IMPACT OF NREGA ON WAGE RATES 2 - AAU

Study No. 138

IMPACT OF NREGA ON WAGE RATES, FOOD

SECURITY AND RURAL URBAN MIGRATION

– A STUDY IN ASSAM

Dr. Jotin Bordoloi

Agro-Economic Research Centre for North East India

Assam Agricultural University,

Jorhat-785013, Assam

2011

STUDY TEAM

General Guidance

Dr. A. K. Das

Project in-charge & Report writing

Dr. Jotin Bordoloi

Field Investigation & Data Collection

Dr. Jotin Bordoloi

Mrs. Runjun Savapandit

Dr. Ranjit Borah

Sri Debajit Borah

Tabulation

Mrs. Runjun Savapandit

Sri Debajit Borah

Sri Rupam Kr. Bordoloi

Sri Madhurjya Bora

PREFACE

The study on “Impact of NREGA on Wage Rates, Food Security and Rural

Urban Migration- a study in Assam” was undertaken at the instance of the Ministry of

Agriculture, Government of India. The ADRT, Bangalore was the coordinating centre

for the study. The draft report was submitted to the coordinating centre and necessary

correction and modification have been made as per comments and suggestions.

The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) implemented by

the Ministry of Rural Development is the flagship programme of the Central

Government that directly touches the lives of the poor and promotes inclusive growth.

The Act aims at enhancing at least one hundred days of guaranteed wage in a

financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled

manual work. The Act also emphasises to uplift the rural economy. In addition to this

it has taken a special care to empower women by reducing gender differences in

wages and their children. The Act also mandates 33 per cent participation for women

in NREGA work programmes.

The present study was done in primary and secondary level as well. The

secondary level analysis comprising 27 districts of Assam, based on the data available

in the NREGA web site of the state while primary level analysis covers only 5

sample districts viz., Sonitpur from the northern part, Cachar from the southern part

,Dibrugarh from the eastern part, Nagaon from the central part and Bongaigaon from

western part of the state. The study was done with 250 sample households (200

beneficiary hhs and 50 non beneficiary hhs), where 40 households as sample

beneficiaries (Job card holders) and 10 households as non beneficiaries from each

district.

The study was completed with sincere help and cooperation of the District

Rural Development Agencies, Officials of Development Blocks and respective

Panchyats of the Government of Assam. I am thankful to all the officials of the

concerned departments. I am also thankful to all the sample respondents for their co-

operation during the field surveys.

Like all the studies, this is also a joint output of the Centre. I am grateful to Dr

Jotin Bordoloi who prepared the report of the study. The names of the research staff

associated with the study have been mentioned elsewhere in the report.

I hope that the report will provide the first-hand information on the State

NREGA for planners, policy makers and researchers.

Anup Kr. Das

Director i/c

AERC, Jorhat

C O N T E N T S

Chapters

Particulars Page

No.

Preface

i

List of Tables ii-iii

Chapter I Introduction 1-12

Chapter II Manpower employment generated under

NREGA and its socio-economic

characteristics

13-80

Chapter -III House hold characteristics and their

income and consumption pattern

81-94

Chapter -IV Work profile under NREGA, wage

structure and migration issues

95-100

Chapter -V The Functioning of NREGA-Qualitative

aspects

101-114

Chapter -VI NREGA impact on village economy

115-122

Chapter-VII Concluding remarks and policy

suggestion

123-126

Annexure I

Comments by the Co-ordinating Centre

& Action Taken Report

I - V

Annexure II References

VI

*****

LIST OF TABLES

Table

No.

Particulars Page

No.

Table 2.1 Employment Generated During the Financial Year 2009 -

2010 14

Table - 2.2.a Employment generated through NREGA and its socio

economic characteristics 17

Table - 2.2.b Employment generated through NREGA and its socio


Table - 2.2.c Employment generated through NREGA and its socio


Table - 2.3a District wise works completed/progress under NREGA

(number of projects) 23

Table - 2.3b District wise works completed/progress under NREGA

(number of projects) 24

Table - 2.3.c District wise works completed/progress under NREGA

(Number of Projects) 26-27

Table - 2.3.d District wise works completed/progress under NREGA

(Amount spent in Lakhs) 28-29

Table - 2.3.e District wise works completed/progress under NREGA

(Number of Projects) 31-32

Table - 2.3.f District wise works completed/progress under NREGA

(Amount spent in Lakhs) 34-35

Table - 2.4 -a Social auditing and inspection of NREGA work 38

Table - 2.4 -b Social auditing and inspection of NREGA work 41

Table - 2.4 -

c

Social auditing and inspection of NREGA work 43

Table - 2.4- d The NREGA payment processed though bank/post office 45

Table - 2.4 -e The NREGA payment processed though bank/post office 47

Table - 2.4 -f The NREGA payment processed though bank/post office 49

Table - 2.5 Work projection under NREGA for 2010-11 51

Table - 2.5-1 Work projection under NREGA for 2010-11 53









Table -2.5-10 Work projection under NREGA for 2010-11 62












Table

No.

Particulars Page

No.







Table -3.1 Demographic profile of the respondents (% or households) 82

Table- 3.2 Main Occupation (% to total man-days ) 86

Table- 3.3 House4hold net income (Annual) (Rs. Per household) 87

Table- 3.4a Household consumption of food items (kgs. Per capita per

month) 89

Table - 3.4b Monthly consumption expenditure of households 90

Table - 3.5 Variability in Consumption and income 91

Table- 3.6 Determinants of participation in NREGA (Logit function) 92

Table -3.7 Determinants of participation in NREGA (OLS) 92

Table- 3.8 Determinants of participation in NREGA (OLS) 93

Table- 4.1 The work profile under NREGA (Reference period - Jan- Dec

2009) 96

Table- 4.2 The activity in which employed under NREGA and the quality

of assets created (Reference period - Jan - Dec 2009) (% of

hh)

97

Table- 4.3 Wage differentials among different activities 98

Table : 4.4 The Migration Incidents Recorded during the Reference

Period: Jan. - Dec. 2009 99

Table- 5.1 Assets holdings (Rs. Per households) 102

Table- 5.2a Borrowing by sample households (Rs. Per households) 103

Table- 5.2b Households strength on borrowing and other household assets

(Rs. Per households) 103

Table- 5.3.1 Qualitative questions related to functioning of NREGA

(Percentage of hh) 105

Table- 5.3.2 Qualitative Questions related to functioning on NREGA

Contd. (Percentage of hh) 106-

107

Table- 5.3.3 Qualitative Questions related to functioning on NREGA

Contd. (Percentage of hh) 109

Table- 5.3.4 Quantitative questions related to NREGA functioning

(Percentage of hh) 110

Table- 5.3.5 Provide details on the following potential benefits of

NREGA (Percentage of hh) 111

Table- 5.3.6 Quantitative questions related to food security (percentage of

hh) 112

Table- 6.1 Infrastructure available within the village (percentage of

villages) 116

Table- 6.2 Occupational structure (% of households) 117

Table- 6.3 Wage rates for different activities (average of all villages)-Rs. 117

Table- 6.4 Prevailing labour charges for agricultural operations (average

of all villages) (Mention the unit-Rs./acre or Rs./day) 118

Table- 6.5 Qualitative questions on changes in the villages during last one

year (% of hh) 119

Table- 6.6 Qualitative questions about the functioning of NREGA 121

CHAPTER – I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

India is a country of villages and about 50 per cent of the villages have very

poor economic condition. In Assam, a large percentage of population i.e. more than

85 per cent of the total population still lives in rural areas. Indebtedness,

unemployment, unproductive expenses, low level of productivity, lack of adequate

basic needs and minimum services are very common problems of the villages of

Assam. In the state, there are more than 26,312 villages constituting 4.12 per cent of

the total numbers of villages in India as per 2001 census.

Keeping in view to these large rural inhabitants, our great leader, the father of

nation, Mahatma Gandhi had given m8uch emphasis to the concept “gram swaraj”,

which deals with economic, political and cultural freedom of the villages for all round

of development of rural India. His concept of Swaraj is associated with more political

freedom for socio-economic development of the village people through Panchayati

Raj, and it is through Panchayats, he dreamt off to make India a strong country in the

world. Although the Panchayats have historically been an integral part of rural life in

India, but Panchayati Raj was formally introduced only in 1959.

The Directorate of Panchayat and Rural Development, Assam has two wings.

One is Panchayat Wings and other is Rural Development Wings. Both the wings have

been implementing various state and centrally sponsored schemes through 21 Zila

Parishad, 219 blocks, 189 Anchalik Panchayat and 2202 Gram Panchayat, covering

27 districts.

As per provision of Assam Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 there are three-tier

system of Panchayat viz. Zila Parishad,at district level, Anchalic Panchayat at the

intermediate level and Gaon Panchayat at the village level. Literally, it is named as a

three- tier structure of local self-government. The government of Assam has already

transferred 29 state subjects to the Panchayati Raj Institutions and activity mapping

has been notified in respect of 23 subjects of 17 departments for empowering the

Panchayati Raj Institution.

The Panchayats gained much importance during the period between 1956 and

1964; the period between 1965 and 1969 witnessed their decline mainly because the

political leaders at the state and district levels did not appreciate the growth of

alternative leadership at lower levels.” (Satya Sundaram, 1999, Rural Development

p.143). To ensure quality life of the rural people, Government of India, has directives

in the constitution in the Article-40 of the part IV for organization of village

Panchayat- as “The State shall take steps to organize village Panchayats and endow

them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function

as units of self – government. In the light of this article a new part IX relating to the

Panchayats has been inserted in the Constitution to provide for among other things,

Gram Sabha in a village or group of villages; constitution of Panchayats at village

and other level or levels; direct elections to all seats in Panchayats at the village and

intermediate level, if any and to the offices of Chairpersons of Panchayats at such

levels; reservation of seats for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in

proportions to their population for membership of Panchayats and office of

Chairpersons in Panchayats at each level; reservation of not less than one-third of the

seats for women; fixing tenure of five years for Panchayats and holding elections

within a period of six months in the event of super session of any Panchayat”. This

was the 73rd

Act amended in 1993. This has been done to provide more power to

rural people so that plans and programmes can reach and percolate down to the people

living in rural areas with some definite objectives and strategies, so that fruits of

economic growth of the country can be enjoyed by the people living in remote areas

of the country in general and states in particular. Panchayat Raj got a new momentum

after amendment of this act spreading over across the states of the country. The

formation of a separate Ministry of Panchayat Raj (MoPR) in May 2004 at the centre

was an indicative of determination of the government of India to give a major push to

such reform. All rural programmes either at central level or at state level started to

operate all its economic and social activities through the gram sabha, a political body

of the gram Panchayat. However, it has been observed that administrative control of

financial matters is still not coming fully under them. As a result, the activities of the

Panchayats seem very weak as financial control still rests with the District Rural

Development Agency and many times, it hampers a lot in proper implementation of

the developmental programmes decided in gram sabha. Absence of technical person

in gram Panchayat also stands as major hindrance in estimating project proposal on

time to place it before the appropriate authority for release of grants, and even if it is

granted, they simply get the information and they are not empowered power to spend

it independently which break down the working spirit of the elected body of the

Panchayats.

District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) which started functioning with

effect from 2nd

July, 1993, as a society registered under the provision of Societies

Registration Act, 1860. Both district level officials and public representatives like

M.Ps, MLAs, Panchayat Samiti Chairpersons, etc are the members of the society.

President, Zilla Parishad is the Ex. Officio Chairman of DRDA. All administrative

and financial powers are vested on the Collector cum Chief Executive Officer. The

Project Director of the Agency looks after day to day administration. The DRDA

receives funds under various programmes directly from Ministry of Rural

Development, Govt. of India and State Govt. and in turn releases the same to various

banks/executing agencies. It monitors the implementation of schemes, utilization of

fund very closely. The Governing Body meets quarterly to review the performance of

the schemes implemented by the DRDA, approves the expenditures incurred under

the schemes.

1.2 Historical Back ground of Rural Employment Schemes

This history is completely based on the information available in the

government publication at different point of times. Basic aims of all these

programmes are to alleviation of poverty through productive employment and to

improve the quality of rural lives.

1.2.1 Community Development Programme (CDP)

After independence for the first time Community Development Programme

(CDP) was launched during the First Plan on 2nd

October, 1952 with specific

objectives of bringing about all-round development in rural areas. It can be considered

an important land mark in the history of the rural development. Its basic aim was to

fight poverty in rural areas. It continued up to the end of 5th plan with some changes

in different point of times as per suggestion of different review committees. The areas

of priority for development under the CDP were agriculture related matters viz.

reclamation of waste land, supply of seeds and fertilizer etc. through village co-

operative societies, intensive cultivation through promotion of fruits & vegetables;

creation of irrigation facilities through tube well ,tank, canal, pumping sets,

development of transport and communication, education. health, housing,

supplementary employment through cottage & small scale industry ,saw mills etc.,

social and economic welfare programmes, training programmes for village level

workers in the field of agriculture ,industries, trades pertaining to the local needs for

repairing of agricultural equipment, tractor, masonry, carpentry, pump set, pottery

etc.(Integrated Rural Development, Perspective & Prospects, Kumar Jyoti,1987

PP51-52) .

In Assam, during 10th

plan under C.D. scheme included some minor

programmes such as Repairing of Roads, Minor Irrigation, and Health & Sanitation.

The Projected outlay during the 10th

plan was Rs. 771.65 lakh in TSP Plan and actual

expenditure was at Rs.55.54 lakh, while under SCCP the plan outlay on the same

heads stated above was of Rs. 68.21 lakh. Of this only Rs.20.83 lakh were spent

during 10th plan.

In October 1974, the Department of Rural Development came into existence

as a part of Ministry of Food and Agriculture. On 18 August 1979, the Department of

Rural Development was giver the status of a new Ministry, i.e. Ministry of Rural

Reconstruction and later on it was renamed as the Ministry of Rural Development and

then again converted into a Department under the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural

Development. It was again brought under the Ministry of Agriculture in September

1985. On July 5, 1991, the Department was upgraded as Ministry of Rural

Development. Another Department viz. the Department of Waste Land Development

was created under this Ministry on 2nd

July 1992. In March 1995, the Ministry was

renamed as the Ministry of Rural Area and Employment with three Departments

namely the Department of Rural Employment, Poverty Alleviation and Wasteland

Development. Again, in 1999, the Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment was

renamed as Ministry of Rural Development. This ministry has been acting as catalyst

effecting the Change in rural areas through the implementation of wide spectrum of

programmes aiming at poverty alleviation, employment generation, infrastructure

development and social security.

All these programmes were continued with little bit of modification till the

annual plan of second year of 5th

plan (1974-75- 1978-79). A Programme of

Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) was launched in 1976. Integrated

means well coordination of different programmes so that incurred investment can

produces optimum returns. From the experiences, it reveals that very often an input or

a service becomes ineffective in the absence of other inputs or services. The IRDP

was implemented through District Rural Development Agencies. In case of rural

employment, after independence up to mid of the 6th

plan i.e up to 1983, about 33

programmes for rural development have been introduced for reduction of poverty and

well being of the rural weak.(Vasant Desai,1988, Rural Development, Vol. V, p 47) .

Of these programmes, the programme directly associated the word “rural

employment” was started with the projects.

Crash Scheme for Rural Employment in 1971, during 4th

plan, Pilot Intensive

Rural Employment Programme in 1972, Training of Rural Youth for Self

Employment in 1979 i.e during annual plan of 1979-80; Integrated Rural

Development Programme was launched in 1979 with multi faceted Programme

paying attention to the rural employment, National Rural Employment Programme

(NREP) in 1980 and Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP) in

1983 during 6th plan. The NREP was launched in October, 1980 and became a

regular Plan Programme from April, 1981. The Programme was expected to generate

additional gainful employment in the rural areas, to the extent of 300-400 million man

days per annum, create durable community assets, and improve nutritional status and

living standards of the poor. It was envisaged that in the case of the NREP, wage

material cost-ratio would be 50: 50, which, however, will be maintained on a project-

by-project basis. Experience in the Sixth Plan in certain States has shown that if

integrated projects were developed, this stipulation would still allow substantial scope

for productive works to be planned within a decentralized framework at the district

level. The RLEGP was introduced from 15th August, 1983 with the objective of (a)

improving and expanding employment opportunities for the rural landless with a view

to providing guarantee of employment to at least one member of every landless

household up to 100 days in a year and (b) creating durable assets for strengthening

the infrastructure so as to meet the growing requirements of the rural economy. An

outlay of Rs. 500 crores to be fully financed by the Central Government was provided

under this programme in the Sixth Plan. The implementation of the programme was

entrusted to the States/UTs, but they were required to prepare specific projects to be

approved by a Central Committee. During 1985, the Central Committee approved 320

projects with an estimated cost of Rs. 906.59 crores. The target for employment

generation in 1983-84 and 1984-85 was fixed at 360 million man days against which

260.18 million man-days of employment was actually generated.

Mid-way during the Sixth Plan, the RLEGP was started with the dual

objective of expanding employment opportunities in the rural areas and providing

sharper focus on the landless labour households which constitute the hard-core of the

people below the poverty line. Suggestions had been made that this should be merged

with the NREP. However, considering that a substantial part of the RLEGP funds

would be committed to the on-going projects and also since it has not been found

feasible to introduce a full guarantee of employment even to a limited section, this

programme would continue as a separate entity for the time being. In the meanwhile,

efforts would also be made to implement a limited guarantee for providing 80 to 100

days employment to the landless labourer households through this programme. The

issue of merger and a wider guarantee could be considered at the mid-term Plan

review stage. Five per cent of the outlays to be provided for RLEGP and NREP were

made available for strengthening the implementation agencies. Further, based on

experience regarding problems of maintenance of assets created under such

programmes, the question of providing funds to the extent of 10 per cent of the overall

outlays for these programmes for maintenance was considered. Maintenance under

this provision would generally have to relate to sectors for which maintenance funds

and systems are ordinarily not available and actual maintenance would have to be

carried out on the basis of detailed maintenance plans to be drawn up for each district.

An outlay of Rs. 1250.81 crores was provided for NREP in the Central Sector

which will be matched equally by the States. The outlay of Rs. 1743.78 crores was

provided for RLEGP to be borne entirely by the Centre. Based on the average wage of

Rs. 8.61 per day as in 1984-85 and a wage material cost-ratio of 50:50, a total

employment of 1445 million man-days under NREP and 1013 million man- days

under RLEGP was generated during the Seventh Plan at an average rate of around 290

million man-days and 200 million man- days per annum, respectively.

The formula for allocation of resources among the States, which provided for

25 per cent weightage to the incidence of poverty and 75 per cent weightage to the

population of agricultural labourers and marginal farmers in the Sixth Plan was

changed to provide equal weightage to those from 1986-87 onwards, because it was

noticed that the existing formula has tended to benefit, in some cases, States which

was agriculturally more advanced. Under both these Programmes, 20 per cent of the

resources were earmarked for social forestry in view of the importance of eco-

restoration and providing the benefits in the form of usufruct to the members of the

community, particularly the poor. In addition, 10 per cent of the funds would be

earmarked for works of direct and, if necessary, individual benefit to the members of

scheduled castes. A separate provision within the RLEGP was made for rural housing

with the objective of constructing one million houses in the Seventh Plan. This was

closely integrated with the housing component of the MNP.

1.2.2 Jawahar Rozgar Yojana

Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) is one of the major wage employment

programmes of the Ministry taken up in April 1989 after merger of the two earlier

ongoing wage employment programmes, namely, National Rural Employment

Programme (NREP) and Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme

(RLEGP). The main objective of the programme is to generate additional gainful

employment for the unemployed and under-employed men and women in the rural

areas as well as certain community assets for the overall improvement in the quality

of life in the rural areas, aims at creating sustained employment by strengthening the

rural economic infrastructure. JRY being a centrally sponsored scheme, expenditure

of this programme is shared in the ratio of 80:20 between the Centre and the States.

22.5 per cent funds are earmarked for SCs/STs at all levels of Panchayati Raj

institutions.

1.2.3 Employment Assurance Scheme

To provide assured employment to the asset less poor during the lean

agriculture season the Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) was launched on 2nd

October, 1993 in selected blocks of the country. The scheme was implemented in all

the then 5,448 selected blocks of the country. This scheme aimed at providing assured

employment of 100 days of unskilled manual work to the rural poor who are in need

of employment and seek it. The assurance of 100 days of employment extends to two

adult members of the family, normally residing in the village of the blocks covered

under the scheme. It is demand -driven scheme and no fixed allocation for the

state/district.

1.2.4 Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana:

SGSY was launched in April 1999, after restructuring of Integrated Rural

Development Programme (IRDP) and allied programmes. It is the only self-

employment programme currently being implemented for the rural poor. The

objectives of the SGSY are to bring the assisted swarozgari above the poverty line by

providing them income generating assets through bank credit and Government

subsidy. The scheme is being implemented on cost sharing basis of 75:25 between the

centre and states. Up to March 2009, 324 lakh self help groups (SHGs) had been

formed and 120.89 lakh swarozgaris have been assisted with a total out lay of Rs.27,

183.03 crore. (Economic Survey, 2008-09, Government of India, p 270)

In the state, up to 2008-09, 1, 75,595 of SHG’s have been formed. Of this 1,

17,497 SHGs have been formed by women and of this 8,073 have taken up economic

activities in 2008-09. As per report of the government, altogether 48,673 have taken

up economic activities during the year 2008-09. In 2008-09, 12,468 SHGs covering

136178 members received bank loan with subsidy. Moreover, 6550 individuals

received bank loan and subsidy for sustainable income generating activities.

1.2.5 Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana

The Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY) was launched on 25

September, 2001 by merging the on-going schemes of EAS and the JGSY with the

objective of providing additional wage employment and food security, alongside

creation of durable community assets in rural areas. The programme is self-targeting

in nature with provisions for special emphasis on women, scheduled castes, scheduled

tribes and parents of children withdrawn from hazardous occupations. While

preference is given to BPL families for providing wage employment under SGRY,

poor families above the poverty line can also be offered employment under NREGA.

The SGRY was going to be abolished from 01.04 .2008 and merged with NREGA.

1.2.5 Prime Minister Employment Generation Programme (PMEGP)

The PMEGP has been effective after 31st March, 2008 with the objective of

providing employment to the educated unemployed youth. The scheme facilitates self

employment through setting up of industries/service and business ventures. The KVIC

is implementing the PMEGP scheme as the nodal agency at the national level and at

the State level the scheme is implemented by the State KVIC Directorate, State KVIB

and District Industries and Commerce Centres and Banks. The total physical target (in

nos.) by the agencies for the year 2008-09 was 1709 of which 1060 was rural and 649

was urban with a margin money target of Rs. 20.51 lakhs. The Government subsidy

under the scheme is being routed by the KVIC through the identified banks.

1.2.6 Assam Bikash Yojana

This programme is initiated in Assam at the instance of Assam Government to

create employment through distribution of employment generating assets with subsidy

to unemployed youth of the state irrespective of rural or urban areas. This is a unique

self-employment scheme called “Chief Minister Self Employment and Vocational

Training under “Assam Bikash Yojana” in place of CMSY from 2008-09. There are

two sectors of the scheme one is CMSS and the other is vocational Training.

1.2.7 National Rural Employment Guarantee Act: NREGA

The NREGA implemented by the Ministry of Rural Development is the

flagship programme of the Central Government that directly touches the lives of the

poor and promotes inclusive growth. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act

was notified on September 7, 2005 and was the first of its kind in the world. It was

brought under per view of an act for rural employment at an unprecedented scale in

order to provide employment when other employment alternatives are scarce or

inadequate. The Act came into force on Feb 2, 2006 and was implemented in a phase

manner. During 2009-10, it has been rechristened as Mahatma Gandhi National Rural

Employment Guarantee Act (MGNERGA). The act aims at enhancing at least one

hundred days of guaranteed wage in a financial year to every one whose adult

members volunteer to do unskilled manual work. Its auxiliary objective is

strengthening natural resource management through works that address the causes of

chronic poverty like draught, deforestation and soil erosion and so encourage

sustainable development. The process outcomes include strengthening grassroots

process of democracy and infusing transparency in governance. The Act is also a

significant vehicle for strengthening decentralized and deepening process of

democracy by giving a pivotal role to the Panchayati Raj Institution concerning

planning, monitoring and implementation. Unique features of the Act include, time

bound employment guarantee within 15 days, and incentive-disincentive structure to

the State Governments for providing employment as 90 per cent of the cost for

employment is borne by the Centre or payment of unemployment allowance at their

own cost and emphasis on labour intensive works prohibiting the use of contractors

and machinery. The Act also mandates 33 per cent participation for women.

The NREGA which was practically launched on February 2, 2006 in 200

most backward districts in the first phase was expanded to 330 districts in the second

phase during 2007-08. The remaining 266 districts were notified on September 28,

2008, and the scheme has now been extended to all the districts of the country. More

than 4.47 crore households were provided employment in 2008-09. This is a

significant jump over the 3.39 crore households covered under the scheme during

2007-08. Out of the 215.63 crore person-days created under the scheme during this

period, 29 per cent and 25 per cent were in favour of SC and ST population,

respectively and 48 per cent of the total person days created went in favour of women.

An allocation of Rs.30,100 crore has been made in the interim budget for 2009-10 as

against Rs. 16,000 crore in 2008-09 for NREGS .(Economic Survey 2008-09 p 270).

The key processes in the implementation of NREGA are the following:

1. Adult members of rural households submit their name, age and address with

photo to the Gram Panchayat.

2. The Gram Panchayat registers households after making enquiry and issues a

job card which contains the details of adult member enrolled and his/her

photo.

3. Registered person can submit an application for work in writing (for at least

fourteen days of continuous work) either to Panchayat or to Programme

Officer.

4. The Panchayat/Programme officer will accept the valid application and issue

dated receipt of application, letter-providing work will be sent to the applicant

and displayed at Panchayat office.

5. The employment will be provided within a radius of 5 kilometers and if it is

above 5 kilometers extra wage will be paid.

6. If employment under the scheme is not provided within fifteen days of receipt

of the application, daily unemployment allowance will be paid to the

applicant.

The cost sharing is done on the following basis:

Cost sharing: Central Government 3/4th

, State Government 1/4th

NREGA was implemented in three phases:

1. I Phase – notified in 200 districts with effect from February 2nd

2006.

2. II Phase - extended to 130 districts in the financial year 2007-08 (113 districts

from April 1st 2007 and 17 districts of UP were notified with effect from May

15th

2007)

3. III. Phase- remaining districts in all the States/Ups were notified from April 1st

2008.

1.3 Main Objectives of the Study:

1. Measure the extent of manpower employment generated under NREGA, their

various socio-economic characteristics and gender variability in all the

districts implementing NREGA since its inception in the selected states.

2. To compare wage differentials between NREGA activities and other wage

employment activities.

3. Effect on NREGA on the pattern of migration from rural to urban areas.

4. .To find out the nature of assets created under NREGA and their durability.

5. Identification of factors determining the participation of people in NREGA

scheme and whether NREGA has been successful in ensuring better food

security to the beneficiaries.

6. To assess the implementation of NREGA, it’s functioning and to suggest

suitable policy measures to further strengthen the Programme.

1.4 Data base and Methodology:

The study is based on both primary and secondary data. As per guide lines,

five districts namely Sonitpur, Cachar, Dibrugarh, Bongaigaon, and Nagaon have

been selected from the North, South, East, West and Central location of the state

respectively. From each district, two villages were selected keeping into account their

distance from the Head Quarter. One village is selected from the nearby periphery of

around 5 kilometers of the district Head Quarter and the second village is selected

from a farther location of 15 kilometers or more. From each selected village, primary

survey is carried out on 20 participants in NREGA and 5 non-participant workers as

wage employed. In this fashion, from each state 10 village is surveyed in detail to

construct a baseline for the sake of comparison. For selecting participant households,

a list of all beneficiaries (participants) in the village is obtained from the Gram

Panchayat or Programme Officer in the village along with the information of caste

factor of the workers. After getting the list, a Stratified Random Sampling Method is

adopted for selection of the participant households giving proportionate representation

of the Caste, i.e.(i) Schedule Caste (ii) Schedule Tribe (iii) Other Backward Caste(iv)

Forward Castes(other). In this regard, a point to be noted here is that the populations

of villages of Assam usually are homogeneous in cast structure. Therefore, caste wise

stratification could not be done. But utmost care is taken to include different caste in

selection of samples as a whole. Due attention is also given to the gender factor. For

the selection of non participants, no such list is available. Therefore, the non-

participant households are selected randomly from those households that are not

participating in NREGA but constitute the similar caste and gender characteristics as

that of selected participant households to maintain the uniformity and to avoid the

selection bias. While selecting the districts all possible guidelines are followed.

In addition to household questionnaire, a village Schedule is also designed to

capture the general changes that have taken place in the village during the last one

decade and to take note of increase in labour changes for agricultural operations after

the implementation of NREGA. The village schedules also have qualitative questions

relating to change in life style of the villagers that are taking place during the last one

decade. One village schedule in each village is filled up with the help of a Group

Discussion with the Panchayat Members, Officials, Educated person and other well

informed people available of the village being surveyed.

1.5 An Over View:

It has already been discussed about various programmes for employment

generation in rural areas of the country across the states. It is a fact that after

introduction of NREGA, it has got a new momentum in case of employment

generation in rural areas. It is expected that it would be able to attain the desired goal,

and a large chuak of the rural population would be able to participate in the

development agenda of the country as bonafide citizen.

Let us have a look on the activities of State NREGA. It is being implemented

in all the 27 districts. The objective is to provide 100 days employment to the job card

holder in a financial year. Under this programme 29.7 lakh job cards were issued up

to the year 2008-09. Of this 21.5 lakhs number of household demanded for

employment and 18.7 lakh households got employment in 2008-09. Under this

programme, 2934 disabled persons also got employment in the same year. In 2008-09,

a total of 748.80 lakh man days were generated of which 78.08 lakh, 258.32 lakh and

203.72 lakh man days were generated for SC, ST and women category, respectively.

More detailed observations have already been made elsewhere as required by the

coordinating centre.

********

CHAPTER - II

MANPOWER EMPLOYMENT GENERATED UNDER NREGA

AND ITS SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

Introduction

In this chapter an attempt has been made in order to highlight the activities of

State NREGA in employment generation in 27 districts in general and 5 sample

districts in particular viz., Bongaigaon, Cachar, Dibrugarh, Nagaon and Sonitpur.

Chapter is designed under five heads as guided by the Coordinating Centre. All data

base information are accessed from “NREGA’s website”

2.1 The functioning of NREGA (Three phase’s district wise)

Table 2.1 visualizes phase wise employment generated during the financial

year 2009-10 in the different districts of Assam. In the Phase I, it covers 7 districts

viz., Bongaigaon, Dhemaji, Goalpara, Karbi Anglong, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur and

Hills. In the phase II, it covers 6 districts viz. Barpeta, Cachar, Darrang, Hailakandi,

Marigaon, Nalbari and in phase III, it covers 14 districts viz. Baksa, Chirang, Dhubri,

Dibrugarh, Golaghat, Jorhat, Kamrup, Kamrup Metro, Karimganj, Nagaon, Sivasagar,

Sonitpur, Tinsukia and Udalguri.

In phase I, among the 7 districts, the highest 36.18 per cent job opportunity

was availed of by SC category in Bongaigaon while the highest of 40.22 per cent job

opportunity were availed off by ST category in Karbi Anglong. Similarly, the highest

job opportunity 41.19 per cent job opportunity was availed off by others category

which includes OBC, General and Minorities workers in Kokrajhar district. The

highest percentage of women participation (43.16%) recorded against the Kokrajhar

district, which exceeded the limit of at least 33 per cent reservation as per gender

norms of the act.

In phase II, the highest 31.22 per cent job opportunity was availed by SC

category in Cachar district while the highest 40.03 per cent was availed by ST

category in Morigaon district. The highest 21.75 per cent of job opportunity was

availed by other category in Borpeta district and the highest percentage of women

participation 39.20 per cent was also seen in this district.

Table-2.1

Employment Generated During the Financial Year 2009 – 2010

Sl

No.

Districts Cumulative Person days generate (In Lakhs)

SC % ST % Others % Total % Woman %

Phase I

1 Bongaigaon 9.88 36.18 5.51 3.96 31.16 19.80 46.55 14.38 16.58 13.54

2 Dhemaji 5.91 21.64 17.83 12.82 11.92 7.58 35.66 11.02 11.80 9.64

3 Goalpara 1.38 5.05 6.94 4.99 11.01 7.00 19.33 5.97 4.91 4.01

4

Karbi

Anglong 3.74 13.69 55.92 40.22 16.01 10.18 75.67 23.38 24.59 20.08

5 Kokrajhar 3.39 12.41 44.82 32.23 64.81 41.19 113.02 34.92 52.84 43.16

6 Lakhimpur 3.01 11.02 8.03 5.77 22.43 14.26 33.47 10.34 11.72 9.57

7 NC Hills 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sub Total 27.31 100.00 139.05 100.00 157.34 100.00 323.70 100.00 122.44 100.00

Phase II

8 Barpeta 1.39 7.67 0.42 5.30 23.32 21.75 25.13 18.86 6.39 39.20

9 Cachar 5.66 31.22 1.29 16.29 15.94 14.87 22.89 17.18 1.06 6.50

10 Darrang 3.78 20.85 0.81 10.23 13.71 12.79 18.30 13.73 1.87 11.47

11 Hailakandi 2.65 14.62 0.57 7.22 20.05 18.70 23.27 17.46 0.83 5.09

12 Morigaon 2.61 14.40 3.17 40.03 18.24 17.01 24.02 18.03 2.47 15.15

13 Nalbari 2.04 11.25 1.66 20.96 15.94 14.87 19.64 14.74 3.68 22.58

Sub Total 18.13 100.00 7.92 100.00 107.20 100.00 133.25 100.00 16.30 100.00

Phase III

14 Baksa 2.25 5.16 20.48 25.48 12.65 8.32 35.38 12.82 7.60 11.82

15 chirang 6.80 15.60 15.75 19.59 17.60 11.58 40.15 14.55 14.12 21.96

16 Dhubri 0.43 0.99 0.10 0.12 20.76 13.66 21.29 7.71 3.56 5.54

17 Dibrugarh 0.30 0.69 0.86 1.07 9.06 5.96 10.22 3.70 3.34 5.20

18 Golaghat 2.90 6.65 3.88 4.83 19.60 12.89 26.38 9.56 6.09 9.47

19 Jorhat 3.79 8.69 2.39 2.97 5.51 3.62 11.69 4.24 5.29 8.23

20 Kamrup 5.44 12.48 5.86 7.29 9.72 6.39 21.02 7.62 1.95 3.03

21 Kamrup Metro 1.08 2.48 1.14 1.42 2.13 1.40 4.35 1.58 1.72 2.68

22 Karimganj 4.30 9.86 0.31 0.39 3.59 2.36 8.20 2.97 0.20 0.31

23 Nagaon 6.13 14.06 5.16 6.42 11.53 7.58 22.82 8.27 0.78 1.21

24 Sibsagar 1.70 3.90 1.07 1.33 7.24 4.76 10.01 3.63 1.18 1.84

25 Sonitpur 2.80 6.42 3.79 4.71 14.84 9.76 21.43 7.76 5.92 9.21

26 Tinsukia 0.86 1.97 1.06 1.32 10.60 6.97 12.52 4.54 1.82 2.83

27 Udalguri 4.81 11.03 18.54 23.06 7.19 4.73 30.54 11.07 10.72 16.67

Sub Total 43.59 100.00 80.39 100.00 152.02 100.00 276.00 100.00 64.29 100.00

Total 89.03 227.36 416.56 732.95 203.03

In Phase III, the highest 15.60 per cent of job opportunity availed of by SC

category in Chirang district. The highest 25.48 per cent of job opportunity availed of

by ST category in Baksa district while the highest 13.66 per cent of job opportunity

was availed of by other category in Chirang district and the highest 21.96 per cent of

women participated in the same district.

Variations of cast component in work participations occurred due to

dominant demographic structure of a particular group of the population of the district

or it might be due to special attention of the implementing agency for weaker sections

of the population. Women participation was at a lower level in almost all the districts

than the Borpeta and Kokrajhar districts.

In over all, during the financial year 2009-10, the state generated 323.70 lakh

person days in Phase I covering 7 districts. In Phase II, it generated 133.25 lakh

person days covering 4 districts and in Phase-III, it generated 276.00 lakh person days

covering 14 districts and all together, State has created 732.95 lakhs person days

under NREGA. (Table-2.1)

2.2 Total Employment Generated- their Socio-economic Characteristic

It has been observed during field investigation that most of the households

earn their livelihood from unskilled casual labour. Most of the households do not

have own cultivated land and a few households posses cultivated land. They usually

go for Kharif paddy cultivation and a few households go for Rabi crops mainly

vegetables to meet their household requirements only. Sporadic cases were also

found as commercial growers. Production is not sufficient due to inadequate

cultivated area and low yield rate. Asset positions of most of the households are in a

pathetic condition. They have nothing in their hand except to go for wage labour in

the lean period or go for as petty vegetable vendors. They also reported that they do

not get work for every day. They have to sit idle for at least for 3 to 4 days in a week.

Very few households have to access two balanced meals in a day. It seems that most

of the households live below poverty line. Other socio-economic characteristics are

also in a deplorable condition. However, BPL rice at subsidized rate and the scheme

The Antyodaya Yojona (AAY) that provides 35 kgs of rice at free of cost to the

selected families is also helping some of the poor families to overcome food

deficiency. However, it seems from their physical appearances that still they are

suffering from nutritional deficiency. In this regard, NREGA gives a new life to these

categories of the people as it provides hard cash to the needy people as they are

getting an opportunity to purchase other essential items for their food baskets.

Table 2.2.a, 2.2.b and 2.2.c show the cumulative number of job cards issued to

the different categories of workers, i.e, SC, ST and Others for three financial years,

2010-11, 2009-10 and 2008-09 respectively. The data in the Tables also indicate the

proportion of participants belonged to the above three categories of workers

participated in the NREGA. The Tables focus on cumulative number of households

that demanded for employment and cumulative number of households offered

employment along with actual cumulative number of households engaged under

NREGA. These also give the number of person days generated under each

component of the caste with a special attention to the weaker gender.

In 2010-11 (Table 2.2.a), the highest number of job cards were issued to the

SC category in Cachar (14.50 )and the lowest number of job cards issued in Dhubri

(0.67) district out of the state total households of 3,57,230. In case of ST category,

the highest numbers of job cards issued (44.88%) in Dhemaji district and the lowest

(.03%) was observed in Dhubri district out of the state total 12,57,748. While in case

of others the highest (8.31%) and the lowest (0.24%) were found in Barpeta and North

Cachar Hills respectively out of the state total 27,54,583. In 2009-10 (Table 2.2.b),

the highest number of job cards were issued to the SC category in Karimganj (15.58

%) and the lowest number of job cards issued in North Cachar Hills (0.34%) district

out of the state total households of 4,54,656. In case of ST category, the highest

numbers of job cards issued (18.42%) in Karbi Anglong district and the lowest

(0.21%) were observed in Dhubri district out of the state total 7,38,780 while in case

of others the highest (9.20%) and the lowest (0.24%) were found in Barpeta and North

Cachar Hills respectively out of the state total 24,18,278. Combining all, the highest

6.74 per cent stood in Borpeta and lowest 1.01 per cent stood against Kamrup Metro

out of the aggregate state total 36,11,714. In 2008-09 (Table 2.2.c), the highest

number of job cards were issued to the SC category in Cachar (10.43 %) and the

lowest number of job cards issued in Tinsukia (0.34%) district out of the state total

households of 3,26,252. In case of ST category, the highest numbers of job cards

issued (20.74%) in Karbi Anglong district and the lowest (0.15%) were observed in

Hailakandi district out of the state total 6,56,166 while in case of others the highest

(10.38%) and the lowest (0.38%) were found in Barpeta and North Cachar Hills

respectively out of the state total 1,98,8104. Combining all, the highest 7.66 per cent

stood in Borpeta and lowest 0.75 per cent stood against Karimganj out of the

aggregate state total 2,97,0522.

Table - 2.2 a

Employment generated through NREGA and its socio economic characteristics

Cumulative No. of HH issued job card

(Till the reporting month) Cumalative No.

of HH demanded

employment

(Till the reporting

Month)

Cumalative No.

of HH provided

employment

(Till the reporting

Month)

No. of HH

working un-

der NREGA

during the re-

porting month

Cumalative Person days generate (lakh Cumalative No.

Sl. Name of the person days)(Till the reporting month0 of HH comple-

No. District

Others

Total

SCs STs

Others Total

Women

ted 100 days

SCs STs

(Till the repor-

ting month)

2010-11

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 5392 1794 105349 112535 48616 48616 11066 0.5 0.24 13.72 14.46 0.52 2865

2 DHEMAJI 11274 564469 44326 620069 82912 82912 48028 3.85 13.26 7.91 25.02 7.98 5587

3 GOALPARA 9139 43640 107934 160713 83363 83363 43040 0.65 4.59 11.25 16.49 5.4 1000

4 KARBI ANGLONG 6898 136071 41915 184884 117622 117622 70748 2.59 20.98 6.06 29.63 9.4 345

5 KOKRAJHAR 5116 63095 102364 170575 153604 153604 26896 1.55 20.85 29.22 51.62 23.74 23216

6 LAKHIMPUR 9094 39833 122341 171268 64148 64148 14326 0.82 5.13 18.32 24.27 6.41 1552

7 N. C. HILLS 1791 32546 6520 40857 13323 13323 2262 0.08 2.67 0.12 2.87 0.64 0

SubTotal 48704 881448 530749 1460901 563588 563588 216366 10.04 67.72 86.6 164.36 54.09 34565

Phase II

8 BARPETA 16184 5242 228815 250241 62112 62112 18267 1.12 0.43 13.98 15.53 3.68 1138

9 CACHAR 51808 9355 127745 188908 53879 47613 20839 2.82 0.33 6.92 10.07 0.84 172

10 DARRANG 8932 2519 140361 151812 87116 87116 25171 8.36 0.97 13.95 23.28 5.26 1086

11 HAILAKANDI 11159 2645 103728 117532 72032 71541 3585 1.37 0.39 13.66 15.42 2.98 245

12 MARIGAON 19318 24517 98507 142342 77099 77099 19061 2.26 2.6 19.55 24.41 1.69 526

13 NALBARI 15812 6651 76638 99101 50379 50379 14413 1.68 1.09 10.04 12.81 0.81 303

SubTotal 123213 50929 775794 949936 402617 395860 101336 17.61 5.81 78.1 101.52 15.26 3470

Phase III

14 BAKSA 29971 70701 50097 150769 59050 58505 23763 2.01 13.92 9.25 25.18 4.3 974

15 CHIRANG 6586 46031 54055 106672 50164 50164 16250 2.45 9.05 9.24 20.74 11.4 1902

16 DHUBRI 2405 360 186226 188991 71697 71697 6615 0.28 0.04 19.33 19.65 4.64 471

17 DIBRUGARH 2926 9775 104889 117590 48723 48723 7137 0.32 1.04 8.75 10.11 2.59 197

18 GOLAGHAT 6155 14714 106714 127583 76296 76296 32430 1.09 1.9 10 12.99 2.91 323

19 JORHAT 6025 14384 76818 97227 45893 45893 8456 1.36 3.02 6.74 11.12 7.86 314

20 KAMRUP 16919 21926 156490 195335 67257 67257 2644 1.6 2.68 13.64 17.92 2.91 748

21 KAMRUP METRO 7450 8735 20787 36972 11971 11964 4875 0.44 0.4 1.06 1.9 0.86 123

22 KARIMGANJ 31341 2252 135400 168993 43174 43174 43174 4.71 1.46 5.05 11.22 0.67 163

23 NAGAON 34813 21992 154013 210818 125208 125208 17113 3.14 3.4 10.2 16.74 1.32 115

24 SIBSAGAR 4378 8449 88761 101588 38087 37960 15739 0.58 0.75 5.69 7.02 1.44 161

25 SONITPUR 13275 23686 175452 212413 86730 84750 21742 1.47 1.85 12.63 15.95 4.68 185

26 TINSUKIA 3693 11855 97917 113465 36316 36316 17372 0.14 0.62 7.33 8.09 1.4 271

27 UDALGURI 19376 70511 40421 130308 81017 81017 6750 4.5 14.6 6.94 26.04 8.4 1508

SubTotal 185313 325371 1448040 1958724 841583 838924 224060 24.09 54.73 125.85 204.67 55.38 7455

Total 357230 1257748 2754583 4369561 1807788 1798372 541762 51.74 128.26 290.55 470.55 124.73 45490

Table - 2.2 b


Cumulative No. of HH issued job card Cumalative No. Cumalative No. No. of HH Cumalative Person days generate (lakh

Cumalative

No.

Sl. Name of the (Till the reporting month)

of HH

demanded of HH provided working un- person days)(Till the reporting month0

of HH

comple-

No. District

employment employment der NREGA

ted 100 days

(Till the

reporting

(Till the

reporting during the re-

(Till the

repor-

SCs STs Others Total Month) Month)

porting

month SCs STs Others Total Women ting month)

2009-10

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 23282 12089 75013 110384 87801 87801 52786 9.88 5.51 31.16 46.55 16.58 8526

2 DHEMAJI 11270 56426 43125 110821 77387 77387 16058 5.91 17.83 11.92 35.66 11.8 5837

3 GOALPARA 11054 41502 98848 151404 79196 79196 43897 1.38 6.94 11.01 19.33 4.91 1316

4 KARBI ANGLONG 6898 136071 41915 184884 135756 135756 0 3.74 55.92 16.01 75.67 24.59 0

5 KOKRAJHAR 5116 63095 102359 170570 170570 170570 98412 3.39 44.82 64.81 113.02 52.84 72120

6 LAKHIMPUR 22149 41647 92762 156558 96227 96227 15647 3.01 8.03 22.43 33.47 11.72 29746

7 N.C HILLS 1536 33494 5760 40790 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sub Total 81305 384324 459782 925411 646937 646937 226800 27.31 139.05 157.34 323.7 122.44 117545

Phase II

8 BARPETA 15979 5213 222417 243609 100295 100295 52569 1.39 0.42 23.32 25.13 6.39 982

9 CACHAR 49707 9022 113910 172639 84996 83395 19167 5.66 1.29 15.94 22.89 1.06 751

10 DARRANG 8932 2519 140361 151812 81246 81246 11477 3.78 0.81 13.71 18.3 1.87 787

11 HAILAKANDI 20366 1776 89554 111696 87305 87305 12325 2.65 0.57 20.05 23.27 0.83 134

12 MARIGAON 18440 23317 90211 131968 65864 65864 23604 2.61 3.17 18.24 24.02 2.47 778

13 NALBARI 14848 6808 75110 96766 69073 69073 14683 2.04 1.66 15.94 19.64 3.68 509

Sub Total 128272 48655 731563 908490 488779 487178 133825 18.13 7.92 107.2 133.25 16.3 3941

Phase III

14 BAKSA 13825 56203 67981 138009 92700 92700 32000 2.25 20.48 12.65 35.38 7.6 108

15 CHIRANG 13200 38355 58200 109755 79250 79250 45100 6.8 15.75 17.6 40.15 14.12 4198

16 DHUBRI 11178 1522 166875 179575 78049 78049 21700 0.43 0.1 20.76 21.29 3.56 485

17 DIBRUGARH 3902 8548 90470 102920 44156 44156 5564 0.3 0.86 9.06 10.22 3.34 222

18 GOLAGHAT 9470 18233 90791 118494 89852 89659 15523 2.9 3.88 19.6 26.38 6.09 921

19 JORHAT 15632 14217 58267 88116 68426 68426 54267 3.79 2.39 5.51 11.69 5.29 157

20 KAMRUP 16352 20175 152325 188852 98510 98510 2680 5.44 5.86 9.72 21.02 1.95 230

21 KAMRUP METRO 7344 8617 20349 36310 18064 18017 11075 1.08 1.14 2.13 4.35 1.72 224

22 KARIMGANJ 70814 16045 58801 145660 37306 37306 37306 4.3 0.31 3.59 8.2 0.2 23

23 NAGAON 33676 20285 146714 200675 140193 140193 30460 6.13 5.16 11.53 22.82 0.78 93

24 SIBSAGAR 4370 8421 58313 71104 31720 31720 17002 1.7 1.07 7.24 10.01 1.18 406

25 SONITPUR 24929 29862 133969 188760 87009 87009 9160 2.8 3.79 14.84 21.43 5.92 184

26 TINSUKIA 3476 12276 84646 100398 39442 39442 29929 0.86 1.06 10.6 12.52 1.82 991

27 UDALGURI 16911 53042 39232 109185 98718 98718 36057 4.81 18.54 7.19 30.54 10.72 729

Sub Total 245079 305801 1226933 1777813 1003395 1003155 347823 43.59 80.39 152.02 276 64.29 8971

Total 454656 738780 2418278 3611714 2139111 2137270 708448 89.03 227.36 416.56 732.95 203.03 130457

Table-2.2 c


Sl. No.

Name of the

District

Cumulative No. of HH issued job card Cumalative No.

of HH demanded

employment

(Till the reporting

Month)

Cumalative No.

of HH provided

employment

(Till the reporting

Month)

No. of HH

working un-

der NREGA

during the re-

porting month

Cumalative Person days generate (lakh

person days)(Till the reporting month0

Cumalative

No.

of HH comple-

ted 100 days

(Till the repor-

ting month)

(Till the reporting month)

SCs STs

Others

Total SCs STs

Others Total

Women

2008-09

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 21998 12089 70916 105003 78143 78124 60248 11.19 6.58 31.49 49.26 16.95 29628

2 DHEMAJI 9451 55112 39180 103743 92805 92805 3050 3.9 18.09 13.48 35.47 10.64 9578

3 GOALPARA 11179 40027 96318 147524 72826 72319 8743 1.09 7.3 12.96 21.35 6.64 0

4 KARBI ANGLONG 6898 136071 41915 184884 179225 178161 10946 3.74 80.96 38.96 123.66 40.33 0

5 KOKRAJHAR 5115 63090 102305 170510 170510 170510 95469 4.68 68.02 83.46 156.16 71.83 95225

6 LAKHIMPUR 19784 33412 84805 138001 76241 74360 9256 1.7 4.52 12.62 18.84 3.88 29124

7 N. C. HILLS 1669 28540 7590 37799 37799 28040 1373 0.97 9.48 0.48 10.93 3.27 5102

Sub Total 76094 368341 443029 887464 707549 694319 189085 27.27 194.95 193.45 415.67 153.54 168657

Phase II

8 BARPETA 15967 5208 206421 227596 91378 91378 2325 1.7 1.53 17.62 20.85 5.95 105

9 CACHAR 34030 5351 83253 122634 105349 90118 42344 9.03 1.58 18.36 28.97 2.91 3991

10 DARRANG 8159 2355 127446 137960 107790 107778 5531 3.75 1.1 17.5 22.35 4.45 771

11 HAILAKANDI 16221 957 72008 89186 89186 89186 0 4.22 0.25 15.87 20.34 2.31 40

12 MARIGAON 18440 23317 88040 129797 129797 56353 26249 3.58 4.12 14.47 22.17 2.92 1110

13 NALBARI 14154 6682 70520 91356 75749 70000 9877 4.6 2.05 23.41 30.06 2.41 1347

Sub Total 106971 43870 647688 798529 599249 504813 86326 26.88 10.63 107.23 144.74 20.95 7364

Phase III

14 BAKSA 13825 56203 67981 138009 138009 23871 23871 0.97 3.19 3.05 7.21 1.09 85

15 CHIRANG 13200 38355 58200 109755 109550 109225 16965 5.8 23.24 19.05 48.09 15.1 0

16 DHUBRI 9793 1398 140168 151359 91047 49813 49813 0.83 0.07 12.06 12.96 4.02 2

17 DIBRUGARH 3219 5782 48693 57694 37132 28559 28559 0.56 0.95 7.47 8.98 0.48 0

18 GOLAGHAT 7122 13472 75613 96207 48285 48285 44945 0.77 2.02 8.31 11.1 1.37 120

19 JORHAT 9104 11475 54119 74698 57302 57302 46758 0.87 1.71 5.03 7.61 0.48 16

20 KAMRUP 15140 29631 126792 171563 96098 96098 96098 3.63 6.72 28.69 39.04 0.07 0

21 KAMRUP METRO 6857 8176 18329 33362 6271 6180 3420 0.18 0.27 0.36 0.81 0.36 2

22 KARIMGANJ 5930 1075 15350 22355 18608 18608 14533 2.48 0.12 1.53 4.13 0.17 2

23 NAGAON 25047 15855 122924 163826 84675 84675 6410 2.22 1.44 9.97 13.63 0.49 0

24 SIBSAGAR 5558 7121 39639 52318 29165 29090 29090 2.09 1.78 4.81 8.68 1.83 253

25 SONITPUR 12802 11482 66427 90711 71440 68520 68520 1.15 1.51 4.53 7.19 1.29 70

26 TINSUKIA 1109 4479 33003 38591 16453 15552 11836 0.12 0.71 4.63 5.46 0.49 207

27 UDALGURI 14481 39451 30149 84081 44516 42483 22882 2.37 9.47 3.94 15.78 2.3 0

Sub Total

143187 243955 897387 1284529 848551 678261 463700 24.04 53.2 113.43 190.67 29.54 757

Total 326252 656166 1988104 2970522 2155349 1877393 739111 78.19 258.78 414.11 751.08 204.03 176778

In 2010-11, the highest (8.50%) and the lowest (0.66%) households having

job cards demanded employment in Kokrajhar and Kamrup Metro respectively out of

the state total 18, 07,788. In 2009-10, the highest (7.97 %) and the lowest (0.84%)

households having job cards demanded employment in Kokrajhar and Kamrup Metro

respectively out of the state total 21, 39,111. In 2008-09, the highest (8.32 %) and the

lowest (0.29%) households having job cards demanded employment in Karbi

Anglong and Kamrup Metro respectively out of the state total 21, 55. 349.

In 2010-11, the highest (8.54%) in Kokrajhar and the lowest (0.67%) in

Kamrup Metro households were provided employment out of the state cumulative

number of households total 17, 98,372. In 2009-10, the highest (7.98%) in Kokrajhar

and the lowest (0.84%) in Kamrup Metro households were provided employment out

of the state cumulative number of households total 21, 37,270. In 2008-09, the highest

(9.49%) in Karbi Anglong and the lowest (0.33%) in Kamrup Metro households were

provided employment out of the state cumulative number of households total 18,

77,393.

In 2010-11, the highest number of households (13.06%) in Karbi Anglong and

the lowest (0.42%) in North Cachar Hills worked under NREGA out of the state

households total 5,41,762 In 2009-10, the highest number of households (13.89%) in

Kokrajhar and the lowest (0.38%) in Kamrup worked under NREGA out of the

state households total 7,08,448. In 2008-09, the highest number of households

(13.00%) in Kamrup Rural and the lowest (0.19%) in North Cachar Hills worked

under NREGA out of the state households total 7,39,111.

In 2010-11, under SC category, it generated the highest (16.16%) person days

in Darang and the lowest (0.15%) in North Cachar Hills out of the state total

generated man days 51.74 lakh person days. Under ST category, it generated the

highest (16.36%) in Karbi Ang Long and the lowest (0.03%) in Dhubri of the state

total man days generated 128.30 lakh person days while in case of others, it generated

the highest (10.06%) in Kokrajhar and the lowest (0.04%) in North Cachar Hills out

the state total 290.60 lakh person days. Combining the three categories, the highest

person days (10.97%) stood in Kokrajhar and the lowest (0.40%) in Kamrup Metro

out of the state total 470.60 lakh person days. In 2009-10, under Sc category, it

generated the highest (11.10%) person days in Bongaigaon and the lowest (0.34%) in

Dibrugarh out of the state total generated man days 89.03 lakh person days. Under

ST category, it generated the highest (24.60%) in Karbi Anglong and the lowest

(0.04%) in Dhubri of the state total man days generated 227.40 lakh person days

while in case of others, it generated the highest (15.56) in Kokrajhar and the lowest

(0.51%) in Kamrup Metro, out the state total 416.60 lakh person days. Combining the

three categories, the highest person days (15.42%) stood in Kokrajhar and the lowest

(0.59%) in Kamrup Metro out of the state total 733.00 lakh person days. In 2008-09,

under SC category, it generated the highest (14.31%) person days in Bongaigaon and

the lowest (0.15%) in Tinsukia out of the state total generated man days 78.19 lakh

person days. Under ST category, it generated the highest (31.29%) in Karbi Anglong

and the lowest (0.03%) in Dhubri of the state total man days generated 258.80 lakh

person days while in case of others, it generated the highest (20.15) in Kokrajhar and

the lowest (0.09%) in Kamrup Metro out the state total 414.10 lakh person days.

Combining the three categories, the highest person days (20.79%) stood in Kokrajhar

and the lowest (0.11%) in Kamrup Metro out of the state total 751.10 lakh person

days.

From the table, it has also been observed that emphasis has been given on

engagement of women in NERGA programmes. Of the total person days, the highest

19.03 per cent were generated in Kokrajhar and the lowest 0.42 per cent person days

in Bongaigaon out of the state total 124.70 lakh person (women) days in 2010-11. In

2009-10, of the state total person (women) days 203.00 lakh person days, the highest

26.03 per cent in Kokrajhar and the lowest 0.10 per cent person days were generated

in Karimganj. In 2008-09, of the state total person (women) days 204.00 lakh person

days, the highest 35.21 per cent in Kokrajhar and the lowest 0.03 per cent person days

were generated in Kamrup Rural.

The table also indicates that a very few households could complete the norms

of 100 person days in a year. The performance of other districts was very insignificant

except Kokrajhar with the highest 51.04 per cent during 2010-11. While in 2009-10,

the same district showed the highest person days in the year with 55.28 per cent and

the lowest 0.02 per cent could complete the norms of 100 days by Karimganj in the

year out of the state total 1,30,457 per son days . In 2008-09, the highest 53.87 per

cent could complete 100 person days showing by Kokrajhar while lowest 0.01 per

cent was observed in Jorhat district.

No significant improvement was seen in completing the norms of 100 days in

the reference years. It indicates that no districts could achieve the time bound target of

providing 100 days employment to each household per year in the years under

observation. It might be due to four definite reasons. Firstly Assam is situated in

heavy rainfall zone which becomes a major hindrance in starting the work on time.

Secondly, the wage rate is lower than the market rate, thirdly labour scarcity during

the time of work and fourthly administrative delay in starting the work or more

demand for employment compel to engage more labour than actual requirement of

labour against a particular work.

The reason might be lower wage rate in NREGA as compared to existing

market rate for wage labour or might be due to some sort of dissatisfaction among the

workers for not getting their dues timely or any other reasons such as delay in

finalizing the plan of works, delay in releasing fund, etc.

It might be happened due to higher population of wage labour in SCs

categories in the district under reference. Also at the same time, good initiative of the

concerned wing attached to NREGA cannot be denied .

It happened due to higher population wage labour of other categories in the

district or the area in which programmes were taken up might be dominated by the

other categories.

2.3 Number of projects completed and total amount spent

As per the Act, all works need to obtain Administrative Sanction and

Technical Sanctioned in advance, by December of the year preceding the proposed

implementation.

Table 2.3a 2.3b, 2.3c 2.3d, 2.3e & 2.3f shows district wise number of works

completed and progress and amount spent against the completed works along with the

expenditure ongoing projects in 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11. All together there were

10 works taken up such as Rural Connectivity, Flood Control, Water Conservation

and Water Harvesting, Drought Proofing including aforestation and tree plantation,

Micro Irrigation, Provision of Irrigation Facility to Land Development, Renovation of

Traditional Water Bodies, Land Development, Any Other Activity Approved by

MRD and work under Bharat Nirman Rajib Gandhi Seva Kendra under NREGA in

2009-10. Each work was divided into two heads with reference to its status i.e. as

completed and as ongoing to show the performance of each district in the reference

year. In 2008-09 (Table2.3a), among the 5 sample districts, Sonitpur district occupied

first position by completing 862 works along 298 ongoing works while Cachar distirct

occupied second position by completing 380 works along with 479 ongoing works;

Bongaigaon district occupied third position by completing 64 works along with 155

Table - 2.3.a

District wise works completed/ in progress under NREGA (In No.) Districts Bongaigaon Cachar Dibrugarh Nagaon Sonitpur

2008-09

Rural Connectivity Completed 22 53 4 21 490

Ongoing 87 155 41 619 169

Flood Control Completed 7 92 5 0 102

Ongoing 36 93 48 74 28

Water Conservation

and Water Harvesting

Completed 12 95 0 0 28

Ongoing 11 81 2 46 15

Drought Proofing Completed 8 7 2 16 140

Ongoing 6 3 14 15 16

Micro Irrigation Completed 5 97 0 0 12

Ongoing 5 87 4 20 10

Provision of Irrigation

facility to Land

Development

Completed 0 5 0 0 0

Ongoing 0 7 3 13 0

Renovation of

Traditional Water

Bodies

Completed 5 24 0 0 15

Ongoing 6 47 1 57 10

Land Development Completed 5 7 3 2 75

Ongoing 4 6 26 76 50

Any other Activity

Approved by MRD

Completed 0 0 0 0 0

Ongoing 0 0 0 3 0

Rajiv Gandhi Seva

Kendra

Completed 0 0 0 0 0

Ongoing 0 0 0 0 0

Total

Completed 64 380 14 39 862

Ongoing 155 479 139 923 298 Note: At present all the districts data are not available in the web site of NREGA for the year 2008-09.

ongoing works; Nagaon district occupied fourth position by completing 39 works

along with 923 ongoing works and Dibrugarh district occupied fifth position by

completing 14 works along with 139 ongoing works.

Table 2.3b visualizes a comparative analysis of 5 sample districts on

expenditure incurred against each completed and ongoing works under NREGA in

2008-09. In Bongingaon district, the highest expenditure of 49.19 per cent incurred in

Rural Connectivity work with an ongoing expenditure of 57.24 per cent of the total

expenditure of Rs 2,397.02 lakh in completed work and Rs.3437.21 lakh in ongoing

works respectively. In Cachar district, the highest expenditure of 28.05 per cent were

found in Micro Irrigation against completed work of the district total amount of

Rs.1,467.47 while the highest expenditure of 48.19 per cent was found in ongoing

works in Rural Connectivity works of the district total of Rs.2078.96. In Dibrugarh

district, the highest expenditure of 47.77 per cent incurred in Flood Control of the

Table - 2.3.b

District wise works completed/progress under NREGA (Amount spent in Lakh Rs.)

Districts Bongaigaon Cacher Dibrugarh Nagaon Sunitpur

2008-09

Rural Connectivity

Completed 1,179.10 315.56 35.50 66.24 1,283.25

% 49.19 21.50 21.14 70.10 61.52

Ongoing 1,967.45 1,001.77 351.03 1,379.80 470.00

% 57.24 48.19 37.18 62.68 56.47

Flood Control

Completed 655.30 316.52 80.20 0.00 275.60

% 27.34 21.57 47.77 0.00 13.21

Ongoing 1,088.56 447.79 314.06 350.60 163.32

% 31.67 21.54 33.26 15.93 19.62

Water Conservation


Completed 206.50 271.42 0.00 0.00 126.50

% 8.61 18.50 0.00 0.00 6.06

Ongoing 154.25 186.59 7.45 111.83 30.50

% 4.49 8.98 0.79 5.08 3.66

Drought Proofing

Completed 174.20 28.26 8.34 18.55 153.90

% 7.27 1.93 4.97 19.63 7.38

Ongoing 86.43 11.24 80.28 87.45 46.15

% 2.51 0.54 8.50 3.97 5.55

Micro Irrigation

Completed 33.29 411.59 0.00 0.00 44.07

% 1.39 28.05 0.00 0.00 2.11

Ongoing 30.92 268.00 18.26 35.18 24.96

% 0.90 12.89 1.93 1.60 3.00


facility to Land

Development

Completed 0.00 24.80 0.00 0.00 0.00

% 0.00 1.69 0.00 0.00 0.00

Ongoing 0.00 10.00 8.34 14.15 0.00

% 0.00 0.48 0.88 0.64 0.00

Renovation of

Traditional Water

Bodies

Completed 86.88 72.87 0.00 0.00 38.54

% 3.62 4.97 0.00 0.00 1.85

Ongoing 80.63 110.50 0.32 97.98 9.31

% 2.35 5.32 0.03 4.45 1.12

Land

Development

Completed 61.75 26.45 43.85 9.70 164.20

% 2.58 1.80 26.12 10.27 7.87

Ongoing 28.97 43.07 164.50 119.38 88.04

% 0.84 2.07 17.42 5.42 10.58

Any other Activity

Approved by MRD

Completed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Ongoing 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.09 0.00

% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00

Rajiv Gandhi Seva

Kendra

Completed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Ongoing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total

Completed 2,397.02 1,467.47 167.89 94.49 2,086.06

% 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Ongoing 3,437.21 2,078.96 944.24 2,201.46 832.28

% 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Note: At present all the districts data are not available in the web site of NREGA for the year 2008-09.

district total of completed work of Rs.167.89 lakh while the highest expenditure of

37.18 per cent incurred in Rural Connectivity work of the district total of ongoing

work of Rs.944.24 lakh. In Nagaon district, the highest expenditure of 70.10 per cent

and 62.68 per cent incurred in Rural Connectivity works of the district total of

completed work of Rs.94.49 lakh and ongoing work of Rs.220.46 lakh respectively.

Sonitpur district also showed the highest expenditure of 61.52 per cent and 56.47 per

cent incurred in Rural Connectivity works of the district total of completed work of

Rs.2, 086.06 lakh and ongoing work of Rs.832.28 lakh, respectively.

In Bangaigaon district, no expenditure is found in three works- Provision of

Irrigation Facility to Land Owned by, Any Other Activity Approved by MRD and

under Bharat Nirman Rajib Gandhi Seva Kendra.

Table-2.3c visualizes a comparative analysis of progress of work under

NREGA of 27 districts of Assam in terms of completed and ongoing works during

2009-10. The work rural connectivity obtained top position with 537 completed works

followed by water conservation and water harvesting with 95 completed works, land

development with 79 completed works , flood control with 64 completed works,

drought proofing with 49 completed works, micro irrigation with 37 completed work,

renovation of traditional water bodies with 29 completed work, any other activity

approved by MRD with 25 completed works and provision of irrigation facility to

land development with only 3 completed works. Among the 27 districts, Karbi

Anglong occupied top position by completing 182 works along with 2091 ongoing

projects and the lowest performance was shown by Cachar and Tinsukia by

completing only one project during the reference year with ongoing works 1335 and

395 respectively.

Table 2.3d visualizes a comparative analysis of 27 districts of Assam on


2009-10. In the reference year, the state spent an amount of Rs.4157.60 lakh on

completed works and Rs.45485.00 lakhs on ongoing works. The highest expenditure

of 70.01 per cent incurred in Rural Connectivity work with an ongoing expenditure

of 64.14 per cent to the state total followed by 8.92 per cent in land development with

an ongoing expenditure of 8.72 per cent,6.11 per cent in water conservation and water

harvesting with an ongoing expenditure of 5.18 per cent, 4.95 per cent in flood control

with an ongoing expenditure of 12.18 per cent , 3.19 per cent in micro irrigation with

an ongoing expenditure of 3.50 per cent, 2.89 per cent in renovation of traditional

water bodies with an ongoing expenditure of 2.06 per cent, 2.86 per cent in drought

proofing with an ongoing expenditure of 2.08 per cent, 1.02 per cent in any other

activity approved by MRD with an ongoing expenditure of 1.98 per cent. Among all

Table - 2.3 c

District wise works completed/progress under NREGA (number of projects)

Districts BAKSA BARPETA BONGAIGAON CACHAR CHIRANG DARRANG DHEMAJI DHUBRI DIBRUGARH GOALPARA GOLAGHAT HAILAKANDI JORHAT KAMRUP

2009-10

Rural Completed 1 17 18 0 0 42 27 2 18 0 8 0 15 11

Connectivity Ongoing 483 496 120 587 246 486 833 295 132 1057 221 1393 372 470

Flood Completed 1 3 3 0 0 5 4 0 2 0 1 0 1 0

Control Ongoing 69 137 36 150 68 41 113 22 17 52 15 108 27 4

Water

Conservation Completed 0 5 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

and Water Ongoing 50 38 11 140 8 24 174 1 0 20 39 81 7 22

Harvesting

Drought Completed 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

Proofing Ongoing 19 11 4 27 0 17 24 66 18 5 13 7 41 2

Micro Completed 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0

Irrigation Ongoing 19 10 3 296 4 34 10 0 44 41 34 7 42 15

Provision of Irri- Completed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

gation facility to Ongoing 5 1 0 22 4 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

Land Development

Renovation of Completed 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 1

Traditional Ongoing 9 22 3 76 6 53 23 5 0 26 22 13 28 42

Water Bodies

Land Completed 0 9 3 0 0 8 6 0 3 0 0 0 4 3

Development Ongoing 27 212 13 14 50 243 158 55 30 135 28 10 46 141

Any other Completed 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

Activity Approved Ongoing 16 20 7 23 24 7 80 1 3 21 1 2 11 21

by MRD

Rajiv Gandhi Completed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Seva Kendra Ongoing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Completed 3 39 27 1 0 58 43 2 31 0 13 0 33 15

Ongoing 697 947 197 1335 410 950 1415 445 244 1357 373 1621 575 717

Contd.--->

Table - 2.3 c


Districts KAMRUP METRO

KARBI ANGLONG

KARIMGANJ

KOKRAJHAR

LAKHIMPUR

MARIGAON

NAGAON

NALBARI

N C HILLS

SIBSAGAR

SONITPUR

TINSUKIA

UDALGURI TOTAL

2009-10

Rural Completed 2 71 57 21 2 29 52 0 0 71 73 0 0 537

Connectivity Ongoing 74 1247 286 1091 460 790 984 329 139 335 566 230 437

1415

9

Flood Completed 0 2 2 8 0 0 13 0 0 6 13 0 0 64

Control Ongoing 3 10 14 123 159 46 85 38 5 19 102 25 77 1565

Water

Conservation Completed 0 67 0 1 0 5 4 0 0 1 4 0 0 95


Harvesting

Drought Completed 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 27 0 0 49


Micro Completed 0 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 37



gation facility to Ongoing 0 36 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 123 Land

Development



Water Bodies

Land Completed 0 15 1 1 0 16 2 0 0 4 3 1 0 79


Any other Completed 0 0 0 9 0 0 1 0 0 3 4 0 0 25 Activity

Approved Ongoing 0 14 4 220 31 6 38 60 0 23 26 0 11 670

by MRD

Rajiv Gandhi Completed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Total Completed 2 182 67 41 2 50 74 0 0 107 127 1 0 918

Ongoing 96 2091 354 1660 866 1572 1686 858 253 551 1015 395 660

2334

0

Table - 2.3 - d

District wise works completed/progress under NREGA (amount spent in Lakhs)

Districts BAKSA BARPETA BONGAIGAON CACHAR CHIRANG DARRANG DHEMAJI DHUBRI DIBRUGARH GOALPARA GOLAGHAT HAILAKANDI JORHAT KAMRUP

2009-10

Rural Completed 3.308 156.938 186.344 0.000 0.000 53.272 17.306 157.132 91.768 0.000 152.062 0.000 155.642 100.096

Connectivity Ongoing 888.050 909.036 1605.678 1192.137 246.442 788.668 603.410 1817.459 763.821 1283.348 1984.785 2376.820 649.110 696.541

Flood Completed 3.255 7.302 29.357 0.000 0.000 1.889 1.728 0.000 1.364 0.000 2.548 0.000 15.290 1.330

Control Ongoing 145.846 256.519 1512.357 192.897 27.266 65.669 124.987 294.165 60.247 76.879 162.154 162.614 117.061 11.103

Water Conservation Completed 1.376 5.875 6.376 0.000 0.000 0.543 2.886 0.000 0.000 0.000 30.867 0.000 3.682 1.233

and Water Ongoing 97.368 43.574 114.996 147.359 1.210 44.852 141.065 1.493 0.000 17.293 136.850 150.626 6.282 70.949

Harvesting

Drought Completed 0.000 5.136 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.435 0.229 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.357 0.000

Proofing Ongoing 34.274 9.357 47.451 33.900 0.000 26.623 10.543 55.519 49.545 4.264 56.554 20.307 19.632 1.003

Micro Completed 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.325 0.000 1.170 0.000 0.000 29.895 0.000 4.055 0.000 23.688 2.890

Irrigation Ongoing 31.487 17.241 33.178 332.829 4.558 14.645 5.316 0.000 184.508 36.296 126.595 21.358 77.732 23.678

Provision of Irri- Completed 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.041 0.000

gation facility to Ongoing 6.754 0.000 0.000 5.646 1.851 5.852 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.936 0.000

Land Development

Renovation of Completed 0.000 0.157 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.874 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 35.501 0.000 10.831 12.972

Traditional Ongoing 14.171 15.441 24.284 151.834 8.001 93.946 19.254 15.543 0.000 36.943 142.259 14.200 26.493 45.515

Water Bodies Land Completed 0.000 58.204 17.160 0.000 0.000 4.667 1.254 34.148 6.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 25.667 17.074

Development Ongoing 58.772 321.328 142.954 18.913 30.034 313.388 89.675 161.412 77.878 133.614 108.969 31.886 64.366 153.054

Any other Completed 0.000 6.528 3.373 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.216 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.949 6.672

Activity Approved Ongoing 56.458 31.010 243.914 9.460 55.775 2.371 22.782 1.400 5.765 17.738 0.982 0.000 7.452 22.416

by MRD

Rajiv Gandhi Completed 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Seva Kendra Ongoing 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Total Completed 7.939 240.138 242.611 1.325 0.000 68.415 23.825 191.509 129.261 0.000 225.032 0.000 248.147 142.267

Ongoing 1333.178 1603.506 3724.812 2084.975 375.138 1356.013 1017.031 2346.990 1141.764 1606.376 2719.147 2777.811 969.063 1024.257

Contd.--->

Table - 2.3 - d



KARBI ANGLONG KARIMGANJ KOKRAJHAR LAKHIMPUR MARIGAON NAGAON NALBARI

NORTH CACHAR HILLS SIBSAGAR SONITPUR TINSUKIA UDALGURI TOTAL

Rural Completed 124.26 228.39 204.08 13.09 24.81 241.15 211.57 0.00 0.00 213.18 550.01 26.23 0.00 2910.65


Flood Completed 0.00 1.32 10.05 12.74 0.00 0.00 12.48 0.00 0.00 39.59 65.69 0.00 0.00 205.93

Control Ongoing 17.71 48.69 10.26 52.79 750.14 85.15 275.81 63.01 0.00 18.15 280.45 136.66 590.69 5539.26

Water Conservation Completed 0.00 127.15 0.00 0.17 0.00 16.51 21.81 0.00 0.00 3.98 31.65 0.00 0.00 254.10


Harvesting



Micro Completed 2.93 31.49 5.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.15 0.00 0.00 20.40 6.38 0.00 0.00 132.65




Land Development



Water Bodies Land Completed 0.00 20.11 4.88 0.20 0.00 81.52 18.94 0.00 0.00 33.61 40.53 3.79 2.93 370.91




by MRD



Total Completed 127.19 432.65 232.86 32.44 24.81 339.18 294.54 0.00 0.00 345.62 774.94 30.01 2.93 4157.65

Ongoing 565.13 2966.55 398.83 838.41 3269.33 2996.08 2713.50 1085.71 0.00 694.52 2024.73 1849.89 2002.75 45485.48

the districts, the highest amount of Rs.550.00 lakh were spent by the Sonitpur district

in rural connectivity as completed work with an ongoing expenditure of Rs.1198 lakh.

Sonitpur also showed the highest expenditure of Rs.65.69 lakh in flood control work

with an ongoing expenditure of 280.40 lakh. Karbi Anglong showed the highest

expenditure of Rs.127.10 lakh in water conservation and harvesting as completed

work with an ongoing expenditure of Rs.229.90 lakh. The highest expenditure of Rs

55.45 lakh was shown by Sonitpur in drought proofing work as completed work with

an ongoing expenditure of Rs.126.60 lakh. Karbi Anglong also showed the highest

expenditure of Rs.31.49 lakh against the micro irrigation as completed work with an

ongoing expenditure of Rs.65.47lakh.The highest expenditure of Rs.1.041 lakh were

spent by Jorhat district in provision of irrigation facilities to land development as

completed work with an ongoing expenditure of Rs.0.936 lakh. The highest

expenditure were spent by Golaghat district with a tune of expenditure of 35.50 lakh

in renovation of traditional water bodies as completed work with an ongoing expenses

of Rs.142.30 lakh. The highest amount of Rs81.52 lakh were spent by the Morigaon

district as completed work with a tune of Rs.762.20 lakh in ongoing works. The

highest amount of Rs. 11.85 lakh was spent by Sonitpur district in any other activity

approved by MRD with a tune of Rs.61.45 lakh in ongoing works.

In 2010-11, Table - 2.3e indicates the highest number of work completed

belonged to any other activity approved by MRD by completing 2211 works followed

by rural connectivity with 1879 completed works, drought proofing with 613

completed works, land development with 398 completed works, flood control with

193 completed works, water conservation and water harvesting with 164 completed

works, provision of irrigation facility to land development with 129 completed works,

micro irrigation with 128 completed work and renovation of traditional water bodies

with 82 completed work. Among the 27 districts, Kokrajhar occupied top position by

completing 2898 works along with 7830 ongoing projects and the lowest performance

was shown by Goalpara completing only one project during the reference year with

ongoing works 2,296.

Table - 2.3 e


Districts

BAKSA

BARPETA

BONGAIGAON

CACHAR

CHIRANG

DARRANG

DHEMAJI

DHUBRI

DIBRUGARH

GOALPARA

GOLAGHAT

HAILAKANDI

JORHAT

KAMRUP

2010-11 Rural Completed 7 99 9 11 5 13 210 19 51 1 12 0 156 154


Flood Completed 1 30 2 0 2 1 34 3 3 0 0 0 7 2

Control Ongoing 81 161 39 155 291 52 199 31 36 70 21 124 34 8

Water Conservation Completed 1 4 1 0 0 2 47 0 0 0 1 0 1 7


Harvesting Drought Completed 38 1 0 0 0 1 14 10 13 0 1 0 9 0


Micro Completed 0 1 0 13 1 1 3 0 6 0 2 0 11 3




Land Development



Water Bodies Land Completed 2 43 1 0 1 12 44 4 8 0 0 0 18 70




by MRD Rajiv Gandhi Completed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Total Completed 50 186 13 28 9 35 363 36 83 1 18 0 232 265

Ongoing 1429 1238 264 1388 1096 1775 2247 634 714 2296 574 2388 784 1343

Contd.--->

Table - 2.3 e


Districts

KAMRUP METRO


N C HILLS SIBSAGAR SONITPUR TINSUKIA UDALGURI TOTAL

Rural Completed 16 30 100 268 24 31 55 6 54 124 327 64 33 1879


Flood Completed 0 0 9 11 11 0 10 1 0 7 48 6 5 193

Control Ongoing 3 251 25 223 202 83 121 49 12 15 120 32 115 2553

Water Conservation Completed 0 19 2 2 2 5 12 2 24 6 14 12 0 164


Harvesting Drought Completed 2 2 0 442 3 0 4 1 7 24 34 6 1 613


Micro Completed 3 9 8 16 4 0 2 0 0 6 15 23 1 128




Land Development



Water Bodies Land Completed 2 33 2 19 4 20 9 3 24 19 48 5 7 398




by MRD Rajiv Gandhi Completed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Total Completed 23 93 126 2898 48 56 102 13 118 202 509 240 50 5797

Ongoing 102 5304 541 7830 1543 2642 2745 1163 618 647 1599 862 1110 44876

Table-2.3.f visualizes a comparative analysis of 27 districts of Assam on


2010-11. In the reference year, the state spent an amount of Rs.8,884.80 lakh on

completed works and Rs.77,764.00 lakhs on ongoing works. The highest expenditure

of 56.96 per cent incurred on rural connectivity with an ongoing expenditure of

57.97 per cent to the state total followed by 15.91 per cent in flood control work with

an ongoing expenditure of 12.73 per cent, 7.71 per cent in drought proofing work with

an ongoing expenditure of 4.41 per cent, 7.16 per cent in land development with an

ongoing expenditure of 8.97 per cent , 4.17 per cent on any other activity approved by

MRD with an ongoing expenditure of 5.47 per cent, 3.32 per cent in micro irrigation

with an ongoing expenditure of 3.30 per cent, 3.04 per cent in water conservation and

water harvesting with an ongoing expenditure of 4.82 per cent, 1.10 per cent in

renovation of traditional water bodies with an ongoing expenditure of 1.47 per cent,

0.52 per cent provision of irrigation facilities to land development with an ongoing

expenditure of 0.12 per cent was seen in Rajiv Gandhi Seva Kendra work and very

insignificant i.e. 0.75 per cent was found in ongoing works during the reference year.

Among all the districts, the highest amount of Rs.1,055.00 lakh were spent by the

Sonitpur district in rural connectivity as completed work with an ongoing expenditure

of Rs.934.70 lakh. The district Kokrajhar showed the highest expenditure of

Rs.906.80 lakh in flood control work with an ongoing expenditure of 943.20 lakh.

The district karbi Ang Long showed the highest expenditure of Rs.70.25 lakh in

water conservation and harvesting as completed work with an ongoing

expenditure of Rs.920.90 lakh. The highest expenditure of Rs 391.10 lakh was shown

by kokrajhar in drought proofing work as completed work with an ongoing

expenditure of Rs.1,042.00 lakh. The district Kokrajhar showed the highest

expenditure of Rs.50.50 lakh against the micro irrigation as completed work with an

ongoing expenditure of Rs.191.20 lakh. The highest expenditure of Rs.40.51 lakh

were spent by Tinsukia district in provision of irrigation facilities to land development

as completed work with an ongoing expenditure of Rs.60.86 lakh. The highest

expenditure were spent by Sonitpur district with a tune of expenditure of 14.87 lakh

for renovation of traditional water bodies as completed work with an ongoing

expenses of Rs.1.22 lakh. The highest amount of Rs 97.90 lakh were spent by the

Dhemaji district in land development as completed work with a tune of Rs. 447.50

Table - 2.3 f


Districts BAKSA BARPETA

BONGAIGAON

CACHAR

CHIRANG

DARRANG

DHEMAJI

DHUBRI

DIBRUGARH

GOALPARA

GOLAGHAT

HAILAKANDI

JORHAT

KAMRUP

2009-10

Rural Completed 82.76

272.

65 52.32 50.14 26.69 21.47 292.73 98.89 123.70 18.25 85.01 0.05 102.11 324.61

Connectivity Ongoing 1825.07

1462

.68 1805.73

1281.6

8 1172.95 2022.13

2014.7

4

2963.5

8 889.61 2181.03 1762.83 2509.91

1174.8

4

1754.6

5

Flood Completed 6.48

97.9

0 0.70 0.06 5.48 0.14 63.61 15.01 1.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.13 5.86

Control Ongoing 623.62

568.

59 879.37 161.61 1615.84 108.96 406.87 955.53 51.74 152.21 92.67 37.54 102.40 9.36 Water

Conservation Completed 15.96 1.81 1.07 1.38 0.00 1.05 18.76 0.00 9.08 0.00 0.59 0.32 0.00 21.84

and Water Ongoing 129.02

31.7

9 95.92 119.88 55.30 40.98 326.79 13.15 15.98 65.56 178.97 190.58 26.56 76.37 Harvesting


Proofing Ongoing 404.64

19.3

3 136.33 88.40 243.11 160.49 63.42 36.05 139.08 23.33 115.98 2.16 23.93 0.01

Micro Completed 34.98 0.08 0.00 27.35 3.66 2.85 0.00 0.00 7.77 0.26 5.46 0.00 0.75 6.78

Irrigation Ongoing 32.72

49.0

2 61.18 256.09 76.62 121.52 16.51 17.04 143.90 121.84 104.94 1.94 112.92 56.99

Provision of Irri- Completed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.16 0.00 gation facility to Ongoing 3.01 0.00 0.00 3.52 0.62 6.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.69 0.00

Land Development

Renovation of Completed 5.77 3.30 0.00 12.17 0.00 5.68 1.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.14 14.31 Traditional Ongoing 11.16 8.62 23.83 86.12 44.97 121.09 72.75 12.37 60.36 57.41 124.82 4.98 57.87 40.05

Water Bodies

Land Completed 16.48

69.4

4 0.20 0.00 3.28 34.22 97.90 6.49 11.08 0.76 0.00 0.00 1.82 89.44

Development Ongoing 122.61

423.

09 96.18 33.30 104.06 506.35 447.50 290.34 88.29 239.00 101.87 7.94 46.83 405.67


Activity Approved Ongoing 606.31

42.2

1 73.14 0.29 713.39 11.26 203.12 2.50 51.05 50.75 44.25 7.00 5.81 26.77 by MRD

Rajiv Gandhi Completed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Seva Kendra Ongoing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 148.84 17.55 0.00 0.00 42.84 45.53 69.01 103.46 86.62

Total Completed 307.64

449.

15 54.30 91.32 39.11 77.04 499.80 123.29 187.32 19.26 92.53 0.37 130.14 466.09

Ongoing 3758.17

2605

.32 3171.67

2030.8

9 4026.86 3248.43

3569.2

5

4290.5

5 1440.00 2933.97 2571.86 2831.06

1657.3

1

2456.4

9

Contd.--->

Table - 2.3 f




NORTH CACHAR HILLS SIBSAGAR SONITPUR TINSUKIA UDALGURI TOTAL

Rural Completed 91.27 244.85 253.30 832.54 71.55 74.16 58.82 28.16 87.88 262.51 1034.53 147.45 322.72 5061.10


Flood Completed 0.47 0.00 28.99 906.80 18.29 0.00 9.80 6.84 0.37 21.16 134.16 9.67 74.92 1413.34

Control Ongoing 1.84 854.46 89.89 943.21 451.18 264.81 153.79 141.90 6.39 14.09 121.98 72.58 1019.51 9901.94

Water

Conservation Completed 0.00 70.25 8.28 3.59 4.29 21.82 1.67 4.51 23.04 18.94 32.71 9.38 0.00 270.34


Harvesting



Micro Completed 7.52 29.85 14.33 50.50 6.46 0.00 24.25 0.37 1.82 3.01 41.34 16.30 9.20 294.90




Land Development



Water Bodies

Land Completed 1.92 19.35 1.50 23.76 10.34 67.36 2.16 14.70 35.22 35.39 53.37 3.06 36.80 636.03




by MRD



Total Completed 106.63 368.23 331.40 2483.44 112.31 163.34 100.51 56.12 167.01 374.14 1381.46 230.41 472.42 8884.79

Ongoing 234.68 7383.51 1615.20 6702.12 3102.54 4129.34 3091.22 2106.77 279.77 999.92 1312.09 1258.92 4955.91 77763.82

lakh in ongoing works. The highest amount of Rs. 275.10 lakh was spent by

Kokrajhar district in any other activity approved by MRD with a tune of Rs.1999.00

lakh in ongoing works. No record of completed expenditure was found against the

Rajib Gandhi Seva Kendra work in 26 districts. Only the Darrang district showed

expenditure with a tune of Rs. 10.16 lakh as completed work with a tune of Rs.148.80

lakh in the ongoing work in the reference year.

2.4 Performance of NREGA- Some quantitative indicators

To ensure transparency and accountability, social auditing and inspection of

NREGA work for proper assessment along with measuring of appropriateness, some

steps are to be taken as per the Act of NREGA. The Gram panchayats are generally

the appropriate authorities empowered to start work (by issuing orders) and to assign

the jobs to the persons who applied for work under NREGA. The Programme Officer

shall also act as the authority empowered to start work (by issuing orders) if the

demand for employment is either received by the Programme Officer or referred to

him by the Gram panchayat. Each and every decision of NREGA programme is

discussed in the Gram Sabha for sanctioning of work. The Gram Sabha monitors all

the works at the village levels as well as the employment provided to each person who

has applied for work. It also monitors the registration and issue of job cards and

timely payment of wages. For every work sanctioned under the Scheme, there should

be Vigilance and Monitoring Committee (VMC) composed of members of the locality

or village where the work is undertaken to monitor the progress and quality of work.

The VMC comprises nine members. The Gram Sobha elects the members of the

Committee and ensures that SC/STs and women are represented on it. It should have

at least 50% of members from among the NREGA workers. The VMC should be

elected for the period of one year by the Gram Sabha. The GP/Implementing Agency

should apprise this Committee of estimates regarding the work, time frame and

quality parameters. The Final Report of the Committee should be attached along with

the Completion Certificate of the work, and should be placed at the next meeting of

the Gram Sabha in the Panchayat where work has been executed. A copy of the

Report will also be sent to the Programme Officer and the District Programme

Coordinator. The Programme Officer is responsible to ensure that local Vigilance and

Monitoring Committees are constituted. The VMC should be village specific and not

work specific. It should facilitate the social audit by the Gram Sabha. Vigilance and

Monitoring Committees also hold meetings to conduct periodic inspection of the

works in progress and monitor for quality checking of the works. If a Job Card holder

has a problem, he can first approach the Gram Panchayat. If this does not help, he can

submit the complaint to the Programme Officer at the Block level. It is his duty to

register the complaint and take action within 7 days. In this regard, there is adequate

provision to redress the grievances of the applicant. The Gram Sabha and the Social

Audit Forum shall provide a forum for public hearing so that grievances may be

quickly redressed. Regarding Social Audit, it is the Mandatory Agenda of NREGA to

be conducted by Gram Sabha, it must be read out publicity for transparency in the

Gram Sabha, people are also allowed to put question on any kind of clarification, and

minutes must be recorded in prescribed format.

Table 2.4.a, 2.4.b and 2.4.c depict the pictures of social auditing and

inspection of NREGA in the 27 districts of Assam during 2010-11, 2009-10 and

2010-11 respectively. In 2008-09, under Muster Roll verification, 100 per cent

verification is needed as per administrative guideline. In this regard, 89.64 per cent

verification was found in the state as a whole while it was 95.00 per cent in case of

social audit, 34.44 per cent in inspection of work conducted in district level, and 94.63

per cent in inspection of work at block level. During the reference year, the total 2,365

Gram Panchayat, 8,567 Gram Sabha and 4,777 VMC meetings were held in the

state. In 2010-11, 13 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Lakhimpur, Darrang, Morigaon,

Baksa, Chirang, Dhubri, Dibrugarh, Nagaon, Sivasagar, Sonitpur, Tinsukia and

Udalguri showed 100 per cent verification in muster roll and no record of

verification was fund in 5 districts viz., Goalpara, Golaghat, Jorhat, Kamrup Rural

and Karimganj.

In 2010-11, 18 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Karbi Anglong, Kokrajhar,

Lakhimpur, Borpeta, Cachar,Darrang, Hilakandi, Nalbari, Dhubri, Dibrugarh,

Kamrup Rural, Kamrup Metro, Nagaon, Sivasagar, Sonitpur, Tinsukia and Udalguri

showed 100 per cent social audit and no record of verification was fund in 4 districts

viz., Goalpara, Golaghat, Jorhat, and Karimganj. The lowest 32.14 per cent found in

North Cachar Hills.

Inspection of works is done by the implementing agency through the

concerned deputed officers at district and block level. From the table, it has been

observed that the number of inspection in block level is at much higher side than the

district level. Generally variation of inspection depends on total number of works

Table - 2.4 a

Social auditing and inspection of NREGA work

Name Must Roll Verified Social

Audit

Inspection

Conducted

Gram Sava

Held Complaints

Sl. of the No. of Total No. of GP Total No. of No. of Total No.

of No. of No. of No. of

No. Districts Muster Gram where

soci- works

works

Inspe-

works

Inspe- Gram Gram VMC Compaints Compaints

Rolls Verified Panchayts al Audit Taken up cted at cted at Pancha- Sabha meeting Received Disposed

Used

Held

Dist.Level BlockLevel yats Held Held

2010-11

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 9703 9703 65 65 228 198 228 65 128 130 2 2

2 DHEMAJI 32992 32186 65 47 1680 258 1665 65 82 64 80 80

3 GOALPARA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 KARBI ANGLONG

32249 11132 11 11 1069 10 1034 8 192 387 0 0

5 KOKRAJHAR 111612 83709 130 130 3961 807 3961 130 260 0 0 0

6 LAKHIMPUR 61028 61028 81 81 1010 615 1010 81 81 0 0 0

7 N C HILLS 601 566 28 9 347 83 264 36 10 6 0 0

Sub Total 248185 198324 380 343 8295 1971 8162 385 753 587 82 82

Phase II

8 BARPETA 19970 19120 129 129 1029 422 876 129 265 258 26 26

9 CACHAR 5400 3469 163 163 866 75 269 163 409 68 39 19

10 DARRANG 26012 26012 75 75 1166 1017 1166 75 193 159 7 7

11 HAILAKANDI 12596 8720 62 62 1111 229 632 62 62 62 16 14

12 MARIGAON 29340 29340 188 180 1409 1409 1409 188 188 3 32 32

13 NALBARI 22194 18035 65 65 841 675 841 65 65 841 18 18

Sub Total 115512 104696 682 674 6422 3827 5193 682 1182 1391 138 116

Phase III

14 BAKSA 16751 16751 102 70 908 202 908 102 102 102 0 0

15 CHIRANG 26500 26500 67 26 961 385 961 67 67 67 2 2

16 DHUBRI 31061 31061 168 168 188 120 188 168 168 168 4 0

17 DIBRUGARH 14804 14804 93 93 551 31 551 93 1395 52 0 0

18 GOLAGHAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

19 JORHAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 KAMRUP 20777 20777 140 140 1650 320 1650 140 280 140 0 0

21 KAMRUP METRO

827 300 22 22 134 30 134 22 329 9 8 7

22 KARIMGANJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

23 NAGAON 1913 1913 230 230 1915 278 1908 230 142 511 8 8

24 SIBSAGAR 10545 10545 118 118 693 99 693 118 602 199 0 0

25 SONITPUR 46135 46135 158 158 1547 345 1547 158 337 953 0 0

26 TINSUKIA 19502 19502 86 86 1062 1051 1062 86 3096 164 21 21

27 UDALGURI 38394 38394 114 114 1154 116 1154 114 114 434 10 10

Sub Total 227209 226682 1298 1225 10763 2977 10756 1298 6632 2799 53 48

Total 590906 529702 2360 2242 25480 8775 24111 2365 8567 4777 273 246

taken up. In district level, 100 per cent inspection was found in Morigaon district

only. No records of inspections were found in Goalpara, Golaghat, Jorhat and

Karimganj. The lowest 0.94 per cent was found in Karbi Anglong. Inspection in

block level, 16 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, Darrang, Morigaon,

Nalbari, Baksa, Chirang. Dhubri, Dibrugarh, Kamrup Rural, Kamrup Metro,

Sivasagar, Sonitpur, Tinsukia and Udalguri showed cent percent inspection. No

record of inspection at block level was found in 4 districts viz., Goalpara, Golaghat,

Jorhat and Karimganj. The lowest inspection 31.06 per cent at block level was found

in Cachar. In 2010-11, the highest with 230 Gram Panchayat meeting were held in

Nagaon district; the lowest with only 8 Gram Panchayat meeting were held in Karbi

Anglong. No record of holding Gram Panchayat meeting were found in 4 districts

viz., Goalpara, Golaghat, Jorhat, and Karimganj. The highest number with 3096 Gram

Sabha meeting was held in Tinsukia district with lowest 10 meetings in North Cachar

Hills. No record of holding Gram Sabha meeting was found in 4 districts viz.,

Goalpara, Golaghat, Jorhat, and Karimganj. The District Sonitpur occupied top

position by holding 953 VMC meeting and the lowest position held by Morigaon

district by holding only 3 VMC meeting. No record of holding any VMC meeting

were found in 6 districts viz., Goalpara, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, Golaghat, Jorhat, and

Karimganj.

It has been observed that there were no complaints received from 13 districts

viz., Goalpara Karbi Anglong, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, North Cachar Hills, Baksa,

Dibrugarh, Golaghat, Jorhat, Kamrup Rural, Karimganj, Sivasagor and Sonitpur. The

highest numbers (80) of complaints were reported from the district Dhemaji and the

lowest each with 2 in Bongaigaon and Chirang. Almost all the districts having

complaint were disposed off during the reference year 2010-11 (Table-2.4.a).

In 2009-10, Table 2.4b depicts a picture of social auditing and inspection of

NREGA in the 27 districts of Assam during 2009-10. In this regard, 82.71 per cent

verification was found in the state as a whole while it was 93.90 per cent in case of

social audit, 36.31 per cent in case of inspection of work conducted in district level,

and 93.64 per cent in inspection of work at block level. During the reference year, the

total 2,664 Gram Panchayat, 9,447 Gram Sabha and 6,123 VMC meetings were held

in the state. In 2009-10, 12 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Dhemaji, Karbi Anlong,

Darrang, Baksa, Dibrugarh, Kamrup Metro, Nagaon, Sivasagar, Sonitpur, Tinsukia

and Udalguri showed 100 per cent verification in muster roll and no record of

verification was found in 6 districts viz., Goalpara, North Cachar Hills, Golaghat,

Jorhat, Kamrup Rural and Karimganj.

In 2009-10, 18 districts viz. Dhemaji, Karbi Anglong, Kokrajhar, Borpeta,

Cachar, Darrang, Hilakandi, Nalbari, Chirang, Dhubri, Dibrugarh, Kamrup Rural,

Kamrup Metro, Nagaon, Sivasagar, Sonitpur and Tinsukia showed 100 per cent social

audit and no record of verification was fund in 5 districts viz., Goalpara, North

Cachar Hills, Golaghat, Jorhat and Karimganj. The lowest 29.41 per cent found in

Baksa district.

In district level, 100 per cent inspection was found in Kamrup Metro and

Karimganj district only. No record of inspections was found in North Cachar Hills.

The lowest 4.44 per cent inspection was found in Cachar district. Inspection in block

level of 16 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Dhemaji, Goalpara, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur,

Cachar, Chirang, Dibrugarh, Golagaht, Jorhat, Kamrup Rural, Kamrup Metro,

Karimganj, Sivasagar, Tinsukia and Udalguri showed cent percent inspection. No

record of inspection at block level was found in North Cachar Hills district. The

lowest inspection 47.00 per cent at block level was found in Baksa. In 2009-10, the

highest with 230 Gram Panchayat meeting were held in Nagaon district; the lowest

with only 22 Gram Panchayat meeting were held in Kamrup Metro. No record of

holding Gram Panchayat meetings were found in Karbi Anglong districts. The highest

number with 4,128 Gram Sabha meetings were held in Tinsukia district with lowest62

meetings in Hilakandi district. No record of holding Gram Sabha meeting was found

in 2 districts viz., Karbi Anglong and North Cachar Hills. The district Nagaon

occupied top position by holding 1,154 VMC meeting and the lowest position held by

Lakhimpur and North Cachar Hills districts by holding only 1 VMC meeting each. No

record of holding any VMC meeting was found in 2 districts viz., Karbi Anglon and

Kokrajhar.

It has been observed that there was no complaints received from 11 districts

viz., Bongaigaon, Kokrajhar, North Cachar Hills, Baksa, Chirang, Dibrugarh, Jorhat,

Kamrup Rural, Karimgang, Sivasagar and Sonitpur. The highest numbers (71) of

complaints were reported from the district Darrang and the lowest with 1 in Karbi

Anglong. Almost all the districts having complaint were disposed off during the

reference year 2009-10 (Table-2.4.b).

Table - 2.4 b


Name Must Roll Verified Social Audit Inspection Conducted Gram Sava Held Complaints

Sl. of the No. of Total No. of GP Total No. of No. of Total No. of No. of No. of No. of

No. Districts Muster Gram where soci- works works Inspe- works Inspe- Gram Gram VMC Compaints Compaints


Used Held Dist.Level BlockLevel yats Held Held

2009-10

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 40085 40085 65 64 227 195 227 65 65 65 0 0

2 DHEMAJI 20943 20943 65 65 1230 235 1230 65 147 64 54 54

3 GOALPARA 23119 15218 81 81 1206 122 1206 81 140 553 19 19

4 KARBI ANGLONG 48288 48288 11 11 2565 254 1877 0 0 0 1 1

5 KOKRAJHAR 45160 18968 130 130 2651 266 2651 130 130 0 0 0

6 LAKHIMPUR 20487 16547 81 81 1096 648 1096 81 81 1 2 2

7 N C HILLS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 1 0 0

Sub Total 198082 160049 433 432 8975 1720 8287 450 563 684 76 76

Phase II

8 BARPETA 28190 27957 129 129 981 315 673 129 258 273 48 42

9 CACHAR 7159 5370 163 163 90 4 490 163 172 9 39 17

10 DARRANG 26494 26494 75 75 675 483 601 75 156 188 71 65

11 HAILAKANDI 20871 10208 62 62 1089 289 581 62 62 62 33 27

12 MARIGAON 16028 15220 188 119 1126 1038 1038 94 187 2 13 13

13 NALBARI 27837 14789 65 65 512 279 474 85 165 239 11 11

Sub Total 126579 100038 682 613 4473 2408 3857 608 1000 773 215 175

Phase III

14 BAKSA 1451 1451 102 30 383 20 180 102 102 30 0 0

15 CHIRANG 24670 8900 67 67 350 70 350 67 245 245 0 0

16 DHUBRI 29855 26668 168 168 496 272 452 168 382 356 29 26

17 DIBRUGARH 9191 9191 93 93 285 48 285 93 382 192 0 0

18 GOLAGHAT 40338 25517 102 102 375 185 375 102 392 187 33 32

19 JORHAT 9740 7262 110 110 512 405 512 110 110 23 0 0

20 KAMRUP 11005 11005 140 140 688 204 688 140 280 140 0 0

21 KAMRUP METRO 1964 1964 22 22 102 102 102 22 329 5 6 5

22 KARIMGANJ 16000 15089 96 96 451 451 451 96 192 451 0 0

23 NAGAON 18240 18240 230 230 1699 985 1578 230 263 1154 7 7

24 SIBSAGAR 11331 11331 118 118 693 150 693 118 540 695 0 0

25 SONITPUR 44076 44076 158 158 1160 424 1450 158 425 775 0 0

26 TINSUKIA 24790 24790 86 86 388 373 388 86 4128 299 11 11

27 UDALGURI 21100 21100 114 90 693 71 693 114 114 114 10 10

Sub Total 263751 226584 1606 1510 8275 3760 8197 1606 7884 4666 96 91

Total 588412 486671 2721 2555 21723 7888 20341 2664 9447 6123 387 342

Table 2.4c depicts a picture of social auditing and inspection of NREGA in the

27 districts of Assam during 2008-09. In this regard, 58.29 per cent verification was

found under muster role in the state as a whole while it was 57.48 per cent in case of

social audit, 30.15 per cent in case of inspection of work conducted in district level,

and 80.79 per cent in inspection of work at block level. During the reference year, the

total 2,616 Gram Panchayat, 8,568 Gram Sabha and 2,233 VMC meetings were held

in the state. In 2008-09, 5 districts viz., Dhemaji, Baksa, Dibrugarh, Nagaon and

Udalguri completed 100 per cent verification in muster roll and no record of

verification was found in 7 districts viz., Goalpara, North Cachar Hills, Dhubri,

Golaghat, Jorhat, Kamrup Rural, and karimganj.

In 2008-09, 6 districts viz. Dhemaji, Kokrajhar, Borpeta, Darrang, Hilakandi

and Nalbari showed 100 per cent social audit and no record of verification was found

in 9 districts viz., Goalpara, North Cachar Hills, Golaghat, Jorhat and Karimganj. The

lowest 5.93 per cent found in Sivasagar district.

In district level, 100 per cent inspection was found in Baksa district only. No

record of inspections was found in 7 districts viz., Goalpara, North Cachar Hills,

Dhubri, Golaghat Jorhat, Kamrup Rural and Karimgang. The lowest 6.48 per cent

inspection was found in Cachar district. Inspection in block level, 12 districts viz.,

Bongaigaon, Dhemaji, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, Baksa, Chirang, Dibrugarh, Golagaht,

Jorhat, Kamrup Metro, Sibsagar and Udalguri showed cent percent inspection. No

record of inspection at block level was found in 2 districts viz., North Cachar Hills

and Dhubri district. The lowest inspection 38.27 per cent at block level was found in

Karimganj. In 2008-09, the highest with 230 Gram Panchayat meeting were held in

Nagaon district; the lowest with only 22 Gram Panchayat meeting were held in

Kamrup Metro. No record of holding Gram Panchayat meetings were found in Karbi

Anglong and North Cachar Hills districts. The highest number with 2,486 Gram

Sabha meetings were held in Tinsukia district with lowest 53 meetings in Bongaigaon

district. No record of holding Gram Sabha meeting was found in 2 districts viz., Karbi

Anglong and North Cachar Hills.The District Cachar occupied top position by holding

2,84 VMC meeting and the lowest position held by Hailakandi and Jorhat districts by

holding only 1 VMC meeting for each. No record of holding any VMC meeting

were found in 5 districts viz., Karbi Anglong, Kokrajhar, Nalbari, Dhubri and

Karimgang.

Table - 2.4 c


Name Must Roll Verified Social Audit Inspection Conducted Gram Sava Held Complaints

Sl. of the No. of Total No. of GP Total No. of No. of Total No. of No. of No. of No. of

No. Districts Muster Gram where soci- works works Inspe- works Inspe- Gram Gram VMC Compaints Compaints


Used

Held

Dist.Level BlockLevel yats Held Held

2008-09

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 27970 20865 65 53 219 164 219 65 53 147 12 11

2 DHEMAJI 21711 21711 65 65 891 178 891 65 65 6 150 149

3 GOALPARA 16343 9588 81 81 743 366 286 81 227 176 37 28

4

KARBI

ANGLONG 31640 9276 11 0 2062 266 1472 0 0 0 31 31

5 KOKRAJHAR 59629 23245 130 130 2909 349 2909 130 282 0 0 0

6 LAKHIMPUR 2564 1752 81 76 225 47 225 81 81 81 0 0

7 N C HILLS 2616 2081 28 5 464 250 122 0 0 2 0 0

Sub Total 162473 88518 461 410 7513 1620 6124 422 708 412 230 219

Phase II

8 BARPETA 88784 34251 129 129 615 351 480 129 387 2 65 65

9 CACHAR 28667 12367 163 29 910 59 519 163 247 284 51 25

10 DARRANG 54926 46769 75 75 623 169 546 75 112 167 167 123

11 HAILAKANDI 24941 5883 62 62 695 208 242 62 62 1 33 27

12 MARIGAON 9533 8340 137 91 646 459 459 94 188 133 8 8

13 NALBARI 18000 17875 65 65 451 400 440 65 272 0 3 3

Sub Total 224851 125485 631 451 3940 1646 2686 588 1268 587 327 251

Phase III

14 BAKSA 4319 4319 102 30 110 110 110 102 102 30 0 0

15 CHIRANG 36310 23602 67 15 872 567 872 67 227 227 0 0

16 DHUBRI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 168 168 0 0 0

17 DIBRUGARH 8864 8864 93 57 153 10 153 93 153 18 0 0

18 GOLAGHAT 22172 7796 102 43 148 58 148 102 1102 102 22 22

19 JORHAT 6340 3810 110 0 305 195 305 110 440 1 0 0

20 KAMRUP 1915 1915 140 140 318 70 181 140 140 140 0 0

21

KAMRUP

METRO 231 169 22 9 24 20 24 22 249 5 0 0

22 KARIMGANJ 0 0 0 0 196 45 75 96 96 0 0 0

23 NAGAON 648 648 230 62 1002 78 907 230 491 263 4 4

24 SIBSAGAR 12562 10493 118 7 364 71 364 118 274 22 0 0

25 SONITPUR 14980 7850 158 0 268 90 290 158 550 230 0 0

26 TINSUKIA 6878 5731 86 77 94 69 93 86 2486 146 3 3

27 UDALGURI 9000 9000 114 98 180 20 180 114 114 50 0 0

Sub Total 124219 84197 1342 538 4034 1403 3702 1606 6592 1234 29 29

Total 511543 298200 2434 1399 15487 4669 12512 2616 8568 2233 586 499

It has been observed that there were no complaints received from 14 districts

viz., Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, North Cachar Hills, Baksa, Chirang, Dhubri, Dibrugarh,

Jorhat, Kamrup Rural, Kamrup Metro, Karimgang, Sivasagar, Sonitpur and Udalguri.

The highest numbers (167) of complaints were reported from the district Darrang and

settled 123 complaints and the lowest complaints with 3 lodged from 2 districts viz.,

Nalbari and Tinsukia (Table-2.4.c) and settled.

As per the Act all payment of NREGA wages has been paid through Banks

and Post Offices. Accounts are opened as individual accounts for each NREGA

labourer against each Job Card and there is a provision of opening joint accounts in

the name of the different household members (e.g. husband and wife). Table-2.4.d,

2.4.e and 2.4.f revealed the NREGA payment processed through bank and post office

for the year 2010-11, 2009-10 and 2008-09 respectively. As reported, distance from

the working place to location of the institute is determining factor for opting a bank or

a post office for transactions.

It has been observed that the labourer preferred to open individual account to

joint account. Tables also reveal that equal role is played in opening accounts and

disbursing of wages by Banks and Post Offices. In 2010-11 (Table-2.4.d), there were

14, 70,855 individual and 24,459 joint bank accounts opened in the state combining

27 districts. In the posts office, there were all together 13, 09,223 as individual and

5,578 as joint accounts. The amount disbursed through bank stood at Rs.28059.11

lakh and Rs.18179.89 lakh were disbursed through post office. Combining both bank

and post office accounts, there were 27, 80,078 individual and 30,037 joint accounts

in the state. Altogether, the total number of accounts stood at 28, 10,115 and Rs. 46238.00

lakh were disbursed in the state in 2010-11. The highest individual bank accounts of

14, 6,612 in Kokrajhar and the lowest with 16,430 in Nagaon have been recorded in

2010-11 while the highest joint bank account with 13,121 in Baksa and the lowest

with only 21 in Sonitpur district were recorded. No record of individual bank account

was found in 3 districts namely Golaghat, Jorhat and Kamrup Metro. Similarly, no

record of joint account were found in 12 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Goalpara,

Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, North Cachar Hills, Darrang, Hailakandi, Nalbari, Chirang,

Golaghat, Jorhat and Kamrup Metro. The highest amount of Rs. 5374.98 lakh were

disbursed in Kokrajhar and the lowest with Rs. 59.60 lakhs in Nalbari were disbursed

through bank accounts. The highest number of individual accounts in the post office

with 1,72,275 in Nagaon and the lowest with 2,760 in Karimganj was found. The

Table - 2.4 d

The NREGA payment processed though bank/post office

Name No. of Bank Account Amount of No. of Post Office Amount of Total Accounts Total

Sl. of the Opened wages Account Opened wages

Amount

No. Districts

Disbursed Disbursed

Disbrsed

through bank through Post

Account OfficeAccount

(Rs. in

Individual Joint (Rs. in Lakhs) Individual Joint (Rs. in Lakhs) Individual Joint Total Lakhs)

2010-11

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 70464 0 1141 21225 0 332.24 91689 0 91689 1473

2 DHEMAJI 25897 81 523.01 113416 74 2059.35 139313 155 139468 2582

3 GOALPARA 22962 0 196.3176 108733 643 1503.4583 131695 643 132338 1699

4 KARBI ANGLONG 102226 1743 2540.0394 25763 654 886.34 127989 2397 130386 3426

5 KOKRAJHAR 146612 0 5374.98 18120 0 205.14 164732 0 164732 5580

6 LAKHIMPUR 97341 0 1272.02 48710 0 687.89 146051 0 146051 1960

7 N C HILLS 16698 0 180.24 14080 0 106.2466 30778 0 30778 286

Sub Total 482200 1824 11227.61 350047 1371 5780.66 832247 3195 835442 17006

Phase II

8 BARPETA 127625 5908 1299.23 52372 1131 373.05 179997 7039 187036 1672

9 CACHAR 34720 339 291.54 118588 1254 729.75 153308 1593 154901 1022

10 DARRANG 41190 0 1132.76 85810 0 1428.67 127000 0 127000 2562

11 HAILAKANDI 73576 0 1160.334 24859 0 497.286 98435 0 98435 1657

12 MARIGAON 47794 265 1375.789 49148 55 1327.462 96942 320 97262 2703

13 NALBARI 17207 0 59.6 81894 0 1272.451 99101 0 99101 1332

Sub Total 342112 6512 5319.25 412671 2440 5628.67 754783 8952 763735 10948

Phase III

14 BAKSA 52620 13121 1770.924 12500 0 239.217 65120 13121 78241 2010

15 CHIRANG 52613 0 1456.89 14092 0 266.97 66705 0 66705 1724

16 DHUBRI 120857 909 510.79 43690 287 1983.4 164547 1196 165743 2494

17 DIBRUGARH 63981 33 692.948 44383 12 357.812 108364 45 108409 1051

18 GOLAGHAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

19 JORHAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 KAMRUP 62954 410 862.55 98715 0 1046.3 161669 410 162079 1909

21 KAMRUP METRO 0 0 0 44423 0 201.8663 44423 0 44423 202

22 KARIMGANJ 25860 445 1300.828 2760 552 29.24 28620 997 29617 1330

23 NAGAON 16430 33 387.33 172275 77 1054.57 188705 110 188815 1442

24 SIBSAGAR 43175 1092 549.105 28985 505 282.873 72160 1597 73757 832

25 SONITPUR 89936 21 1077.895 50591 1 633.051 140527 22 140549 1711

26 TINSUKIA 44639 32 760.17217 10005 2 139.54713 54644 34 54678 900

27 UDALGURI 73478 27 2142.81888 24086 331 535.70472 97564 358 97922 2679

Sub Total 646543 16123 11512.25 546505 1767 6770.55 1193048 17890 1210938 18284

Total 1470855 24459 28059.11 1309223 5578 18179.89 2780078 30037 2810115 46238

highest 1254 of joint account were found in Cachar and the lowest with only one was

found in Sonitpur in the post office. The highest amount of Rs.2059.35 lakh in

Dhemaji was disbursed and lowest amount of Rs.29.24 lakh were disbursed through

post office in Karimgang district. In aggregate i.e. combining both bank and post

office account ,the highest individual account with 18,8,705 in Nagaon and the

lowest individual account with 2,8,620 in Karimganj were observed and incase of

joint account, the highest 13,121 were found in Baksa and the lowest 22 was found in

Sonitpur. In overall combining both individual and joint account, the highest account

number with 1,88,815 were in Nagaon and the lowest with 30,778 were in North

Cachar Hills. The highest total amount disbursed through bank and post office was of

Rs.5,580 lakh in Kokrojhar and the lowest amount of Rs.202 lakh in Kamrup Metro.

In 2009-10, (Table-2.4.e) there were 14, 05,031 individual and 78,450 joint

bank accounts opened in the state combining 27 districts. In the posts office, there

were all together 13,14,323 as individual and 26,360 as joint accounts. The amount

disbursed through bank stood at Rs.30,387.12 lakh and Rs. 18,102.44 lakh were

disbursed through post office. Combining both bank and post office accounts, there

were 27,19,354 individual and 1,04,810 joint accounts in the state. Altogether, the

total number of accounts stood at 28, 24,164 and Rs. 48,490.00 lakh were disbursed in

the state in 2009-10. The highest individual bank accounts of 1,64,330 in Nagaon and

the lowest with 17,207 in Nalbari have been recorded in 2009-10 while the highest

joint bank account with 67,380 in Bongaigaon and the lowest with only 2 in

Sivasagor district were recorded. There were no record of individual bank account in

2 districts viz., Bongaigaon and Kamrup Metro and 11 districts viz., Goalpara, Karbi

Anglong, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, North Cachar Hills, Darrang, Hailakandi, Nalbari,

Chirang, Golaghat, and Kamrup Metro did not have joint bank accounts. The highest

amount of Rs. 3232.87 lakh were disbursed in Bongaigaon and the lowest with Rs.

293.75 lakhs in Nagaon were disbursed through bank accounts. The highest number

of individual accounts in the post office with 1,72,253 in Nagaon and the lowest with

2,117 in Baksa were found. The highest 20,421 of joint account were found in

Bongaigaon and the lowest with only 12 were found in Dibrugarh in the post office.

The highest amount of Rs.2458.96 lakh were disbursed in Dhemaji and lowest amount

of Rs.56.00 lakh were disbursed through post office in Karimgang district. In

aggregate i.e. combining both bank and post office account, the highest number of

Table - 2.4 e




Amount

No. Districts

Disbursed Disbursed

Disbrsed



(Rs. in


2009-10

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 0 67380 3232.87 0 20421 742.33 0 87801 87801 3975

2 DHEMAJI 26116 81 678.04 158690 74 2458.96 184806 155 184961 3137

3 GOALPARA 22471 0 309.71 104918 1721 766.29 127389 1721 129110 1076

4 KARBI ANGLONG 64590 0 1114.94 15734 0 76.5 80324 0 80324 1191

5 KOKRAJHAR 92639 0 1407.86 14250 0 165.07 106889 0 106889 1573

6 LAKHIMPUR 78762 0 1941.86 31417 0 960.65 110179 0 110179 2903

7 N C HILLS 13576 0 0 10968 0 0 24544 0 24544 0

Sub Total 298154 67461 8685.28 335977 22216 5169.8 634131 89677 723808 13855

Phase II

8 BARPETA 113569 5908 1842.89 50650 1131 412.4 164219 7039 171258 2255

9 CACHAR 28736 613 594.12 115366 1244 1544.2 144102 1857 145959 2138

10 DARRANG 41190 0 717.3 85810 0 985.93 127000 0 127000 1703

11 HAILAKANDI 85149 0 1953.08 10286 0 58.35 95435 0 95435 2011

12 MARIGAON 43990 265 1320.026 34580 55 818.831 78570 320 78890 2139

13 NALBARI 17207 0 569.811 79559 0 1254.75 96766 0 96766 1825

Sub Total 329841 6786 6997.23 376251 2430 5074.46 706092 9216 715308 12071

Phase III

14 BAKSA 73183 1689 2482.39 2117 0 172.7 75300 1689 76989 2655

15 CHIRANG 51092 0 1658.2 13284 0 212.03 64376 0 64376 1870

16 DHUBRI 43601 909 1349.56 43520 287 675.22 87121 1196 88317 2025

17 DIBRUGARH 58141 33 743.22 37155 12 152.36 95296 45 95341 895

18 GOLAGHAT 28307 0 784.9886 67553 0 1541.888 95860 0 95860 2327

19 JORHAT 37286 75 426.23 39418 789 562.2264 76704 864 77568 988

20 KAMRUP 62954 410 877.84 97151 0 950.99 160105 410 160515 1829

21 KAMRUP METRO 0 0 0 39622 0 413.94 39622 0 39622 414

22 KARIMGANJ 37207 99 700.73 2230 0 56 39437 99 39536 757

23 NAGAON 164330 33 293.75 172253 77 1579.79 336583 110 336693 1874

24 SIBSAGAR 29395 2 507.401 19036 49 377.694 48431 51 48482 885

25 SONITPUR 88800 21 1333.58477 50591 0 487.862 139391 21 139412 1822

26 TINSUKIA 39239 32 1056.97495 5241 0 110.79615 44480 32 44512 1168

27 UDALGURI 63501 900 2489.745 12924 500 564.685 76425 1400 77825 3055

Sub Total 777036 4203 14704.61 602095 1714 7858.18 1379131 5917 1385048 22564

Total 1405031 78450 30387.12 1314323 26360 18102.44 2719354 104810 2824164 48490

individual account with 33,6,583 in Nagaon and the lowest individual account with

24,544 in North Cachar Hills were found and incase of joint account, the highest

number of 87,801 were found in Bangaigaon and the lowest 21 was found in

Sonitpur. In overall combining both individual and joint account, the highest account

number with 33,66,93 were in Nagaon and the lowest with 24,544 were in North

Cachar Hills. The highest total amount disbursed through bank and post office were of

Rs.3975 lakh in Bongaigaon and the lowest amount of Rs. 414.00 lakh in Kamrup

Metro.

In 2008-09, (Table- 2.4.f) there were 10, 16,124 individual and 15,727 joint

bank accounts opened in the state combining 27 districts. In the posts office, there

were all together 7, 34,254 as individual and 1,783 as joint accounts. The amount

disbursed through bank stood at Rs.10,725.72 lakh and Rs. 5,429.21 lakh were

disbursed through post office. Combining both bank and post office accounts, there

were 17,50,378 individual and 17,510 joint accounts in the state. Altogether, the total

number of accounts stood at 17,67,888 and Rs. 16,155 lakh were disbursed in the state

in 2008-09. The highest individual bank accounts of 1,52,525 in Karimganj and the

lowest with 1,370 in North Cachar Hills have been recorded in 2008-09 while the

highest joint bank account with 5,908 in Barpeta and the lowest with only 10 in

Jorhat district were recorded. There were no record of individual bank account in 1

district viz., Kamrup Metro and 13 districts viz., Bongaigaon, Dhemaji, Karbi

Anglong, Kokrajhar, Lakhimpur, North Cachar Hills, Darrang, Hailakandi, Morigaon,

Nalbari, Chirang, Golaghat, and Kamrup Metro did not show joint bank accounts. The

highest amount of Rs. 3086.79 lakh were disbursed in Bongaigaon and the lowest

with Rs. 0.65 lakhs in Goalpara were disbursed through bank accounts. The highest

number of individual accounts in the post office with 1,45,487 in Dhemaji and the

lowest with only one in Karimganj were found. The highest 867 of joint account were

found in Borpeta and the lowest with only 1 was found in Sonitpur in the post office.

The highest amount of Rs.943.15 lakh were disbursed in Dhemaji and lowest amount

of Rs.0.02 lakh were disbursed through post office in Hilakandi district. In aggregate

i.e. combining both bank and post office account ,the highest number of individual

account with 1,70,702 in Dhemaji and the lowest individual account with 5,520 in

North Cachar Hills were found and incase of joint account, the highest number of

6775 were found in Borpeta and the lowest 15 was found in Tinsukia. In overall

combining both individual and joint account, the highest account number with 1,70,702

Table - 2.4 f




Amount

No. Districts

Disbursed Disbursed

Disbrsed



(Rs. in


2009-10

Phase I

1 BONGAIGAON 63824 0 3086.79 14319 0 763.7 78143 0 78143 3851

2 DHEMAJI 25215 0 297.5 145487 0 943.15 170702 0 170702 1241

3 GOALPARA 5958 5337 0.65 5485 0 0 11443 5337 16780 1

4 KARBI ANGLONG 70344 0 415.5 687 0 0.83 71031 0 71031 417

5 KOKRAJHAR 49479 0 81.02 992 0 0 50471 0 50471 81

6 LAKHIMPUR 69255 0 1025.52 20145 0 256.67 89400 0 89400 1283

7 N C HILLS 1370 0 0 4150 0 0 5520 0 5520 0

Sub Total 285445 5337 4906.98 191265 0 1964.35 476710 5337 482047 6874

Phase II

8 BARPETA 83244 5908 183.18 37915 867 29.77 121159 6775 127934 213

9 CACHAR 11145 468 68.27 60202 571 175.24 71347 1039 72386 243

10 DARRANG 31098 0 189.98 37195 0 63.5 68293 0 68293 254

11 HAILAKANDI 44479 0 14.33 531 0 0.02 45010 0 45010 14

12 MARIGAON 38986 0 938.04 28158 0 207.84 67144 0 67144 1146

13 NALBARI 17207 0 71.017 51755 0 365.579 68962 0 68962 437

Sub Total 226159 6376 1464.82 215756 1438 841.95 441915 7814 449729 2307

Phase III

14 BAKSA 31633 1689 358.62 2117 0 196.48 33750 1689 35439 555

15 CHIRANG 42410 0 243.06 3058 0 1.53 45468 0 45468 245

16 DHUBRI 38725 909 574.49848 33852 102 420.343 72577 1011 73588 994

17 DIBRUGARH 27351 33 660.05 1163 12 31.3 28514 45 28559 691

18 GOLAGHAT 19040 0 284.24905 34707 0 365.80954 53747 0 53747 650

19 JORHAT 26881 10 393.22 26102 183 192.47663 52983 193 53176 585

20 KAMRUP 39680 410 0 62144 0 0 101824 410 102234 0

21 KAMRUP METRO 0 0 0 19140 0 108.47 19140 0 19140 108

22 KARIMGANJ 152525 99 329.99 1 0 0.046 152526 99 152625 330

23 NAGAON 14220 784 158.91 122617 0 896.3 136837 784 137621 1055

24 SIBSAGAR 15849 13 368.47 13256 47 309.58 29105 60 29165 678

25 SONITPUR 65667 20 483.923 5077 1 79.947 70744 21 70765 564

26 TINSUKIA 16814 15 383.37066 1253 0 13.41803 18067 15 18082 396

27 UDALGURI 13725 32 115.56 2746 0 7.21432 16471 32 16503 123

Sub Total 504520 4014 4353.92 327233 345 2622.91 831753 4359 836112 6974

Total 1016124 15727 10725.72 734254 1783 5429.21 1750378 17510 1767888 16155

were in Dhemaji and the lowest with 5,520 were in North Cachar Hills. The highest

total amount disbursed through bank and post office was of Rs.3851 lakh in

Bongaigaon and the lowest amount of Rs1.00 lakh in Goalpara. For this very reason,

the highest estimated cost also incurred on unskilled wages and on materials including

the wage of skilled and semi-skilled workers under this scheme. However, the ratio of

wages and material has been fixed at 60:40 as per specification.

2.5 Work Projection under NREGA for 2010-11 in the state

The details of work projection of different schemes in the state (combining

all districts) under NREGA has been presented in Table-2.5. The highest numbers of

spill over works from previous year were at 4,892 under rural connectivity and the

lowest 2 was under Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra. The highest total

numbers of works taken up in the current year were at 14,489 under again rural

connectivity and the lowest 1 again was found under Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi

Sewa Kendra. The highest numbers of works likely to spill over from current

financial year to next were at 7,703 again under rural connectivity and the lowest at

3 was found again under the same scheme as mentioned above. The highest numbers

of new works proposed for the next financial year were at 20,598 and the lowest at 4

was under the same scheme. The benefit achieved in terms of different units was also

incorporated in this table. The state projected a total of 1871.75 lakh person days to be

generated from these proposed works. Among the 10 scheme, the scheme rural

connectivity generated the highest (41.95%) person days. It might be happened due to

the prevailing poor road connectivity in the villages of Assam for which it assumed

top priority among all the ongoing schemes under NREGA. While the lowest with

0.01 per cent was found under the under Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra.

The state also incurred an estimated cost of Rs 5,95,63,956.75 Laces on unskilled

wage while it was of Rs. 1,34,51,256.86 Laces on material including skilled and semi-

skilled wages. Combining both, the estimated cost stood at Rs.7,30,15,213.61 Laces.

However, the ratio of wages and material has been fixed at 60:40 as per specification.

2.5.1 District wise Work Projection under NREGA for 2010-11 in Assam

Table 2.5.1 to 2.5.27 gives a picture of work projection of 27 districts of

Assam under different schemes of NREGA in 2010-11. The problem of spill over

works seems very acute in all the districts. The highest numbers of spill over works

from previous year were at 2769 in Karimganj district and the lowest 4 in Cachar

district. Among all the districts, Karbi Anglong occupied top position by having a

Table – 2.5

Work projection under NREGA for 2010-11

No. of Works Estimated Cost (in Lakhs)

Shelf of works Total No of Total No of Likeiy to Spill No. of New Benefit Persondays On On Material

Through Which Spill over New Works Over From Works Achieved To be Unskilled Including Total

Employment to Works From Taken up in Current Proposed for Unit Generated Wage skilled and

be Provided Previous year Current year

Financial

Year Next Financial

semi-skilled

to Next Year

wages

Assam

Rural Connectivity 4892 14489 7703 20598 65037.6 78524193 20762833.32 3812141.71 24574975.03

(52.47) (52.47) (52.39) (52.44)

Flood Control & 1279 4830 2203 6229 155316.53 26822165 5700937.22 1884109.35 7585046.57

Protection (20.06) (20.06) (20.58) (20.27)

Water Conservation 1004 3886 2076 15839 36761434.2 18869232 7491848.59 1128447.32 8620295.91


(6.96) (6.96) (6.73) (6.87)

Drought Proofing 907 2487 1289 5929 111476.68 12154204 9872902.71 1260050.31 11132953.02

(6.29) (6.29) (6.44) (6.35)

Micro Irrigation Works 668 2765 1315 7896 674237.53 11434123 1044575.7 346584.41 1391160.11

(3.19) (3.19) (2.39) (3.08)


facility to land Development 1103 1555 1804 12213 60016.32 5887167

2949259.7 1416319.67 4365579.37

Renovation of Tradi- 620 1574 1033 7880 52677846.07 10151916 4102204.54 278304.48 4380509.02

tional Water Bodies

(3.02) (3.02) (3.02) (3.02)

Land Development 1475 5606 2531 19182 935909.68 20484482 7101612.73 2965215.28 10066828.01

(8.02) (8.02) (7.90) (7.97)

Any other Activity 261 153 58 927 130707.21 2834735 62580.65 43283.11 105863.76

Approved by MRD

- - - -

Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra 2 1 3 4 2.5 12292

475201.59 316801.22 792002.81

Total 12211 37346 20015 96697 187174509 59563956.75 13451256.86 73015213.61

Note : Figures in parenthesis percentage to total.

total number of works taken up in current year with 5936 works combing all the

schemes and the lowest position was occupied by Dibrugarh district with only 126

works while highest number of works likely to be spilled over from the current

financial year to the next year at 2022 in Cachar and the lowest was at only 1 in

Sivasagor district while in case of Karbi Anglong and Udalguri district did not show

any record spill over works. It happened as these districts did not take up much new

works in the current financial year. The highest number of new works i.e. 29,689 were

proposed for the next financial by the Kokrajhar district while the lowest with 185 by

the district Kamrup Metro. No new works proposal was found in Karbi Anglong

district for the next financial year. The highest benefit was achieved by the district

Golaghat and the lowest by the district Darrang under the rural connectivity work.

The highest benefit was achieved by the district Kokrajhar and the lowest by the

district Nalbari under the flood control and protection work. The highest benefit was

achieved by the district Lakhimpur and the lowest by the district Dhubri under water

conservation and water harvesting work. The highest benefit was achieved by the

district Sivasagar and the lowest by the district Nalbari under the drought proofing

work. The highest benefit was achieved by the district Kokrajhar and the lowest by

the district Sivasagar under the micro irrigation work. The highest benefit was

achieved by the district Nalbari and the lowest by the district Morigaon and Sivasagar

under the provision of irrigation facility to land owned work. There was no report of

works under this works in 2 districts viz., Bongaigaon and Kokrajhar. The highest

benefit was achieved by the district Lakhimpur and the lowest by the district Karbi

Anglong under the renovation of traditional water bodies’ work. The highest benefit

was achieved by the district Lakhimpur and the lowest by the district Goalpara under

the land development work. The highest benefit was achieved by the district

Lakhimpur and the lowest by the district Darrang under the any other activity

approved by MRD. There was no report of any achievement in 17 districts viz., Baksa,

Borpeta, Chirang, Goalpara, Hailakandi, Kamrup Rural, Kamrup Metro, Karbi Anglong,

Kokrajhar, Bongaigaon, North Cachar Hills, Nalbari, Nagaon, Sivasagor, Sonitpur,

Morigaon and Dhubri. This might be happened due to no works were initiated by

these districts and if initiated by some districts their number were very few. All most

all the districts did not report of work under the Bharat Nirman Rajib Gandhi Seva

Kendra. Among all the districts, the district Lakhimpur occupied top position by

projecting to generate the highest 185.06 lakh total person days while the district Sivasagar

Table-2.5-1

BAKSA

Shelf of works Through Which

Employment to be Provided

Total No. of Spill over

Works From Previous year

Total No. of New Works Taken up in Current Year

No. of Works Likely to Spill

Over From Current Financial

Year to Next financial

No. Of New Works

Proposed for next financial

year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated

Estimated Cost (In Lakhs)

On Unskilled Wage

On Material including skilled and semiskilled wages

Total


Flood Control and Protection 34 136 38 572 97.73 2579167 2579.55 1719.56 4299.11

Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 22 64 42 942 11924511 1847890 1971.55 1314.36 3285.91



Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 0 0 0 1104 14545.62 412324 411.44 274.86 686.3

Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 2 26 4 1107 2554410 1339804 1333.45 889.02 2222.47


Any Other activity Approved by MRD 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 390 1300 452 8540 16011183 16128 10782.95 26910.95

Table-2.5.2

BARPETA




Works From Previous year



Over From Current Financial


No. Of New Works

Proposed for next financial

year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total



Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 40 92 95 137 523596.4 271967 272 232.05 504.05




Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 40 39 36 32 183974.6 114822 114.84 88.01 202.85




Total 880 1498 1466 2056 4622050 4613.28 3585.61 8198.89

Table 2.5.3

BONGAIGAON

Shelf of works Through Which Employment to be

Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year

No. of Works Likely to

Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New

Works Proposed for next financial

year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage

On Material including

skilled and semiskilled

wages

Total






Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





Total 170 52 159 451 11038400 11038.4 7358.74 18397.14

Table-2.5.4

CACHAR



Total No. of Spill over Works

From Previous year


No. of Works Likely to Spill Over From

Current Financial Year to Next financial

No. Of New Works Proposed for next financial

year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total


Flood Control and Protection 0 351 260 209 1877 636880 636.88 325.89 962.77

Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 1 375 289 217 278252.8 478168 478.17 245.21 723.38








Total 4 2574 2022 1793 4714298 4714.3 2696.77 7411.07

Table-2.5.5

CHIRANG


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total





Micro Irrigation Works 4 47 40 169 707 923602 923.6 726.42 1650.02






Total 298 737 520 1810 11234728 13209.11 8479.23 21688.34

Table 2.5.6

DARRANG


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total







Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 2 4 0 135 160584.7 141453 143 110.7 253.7


Any Other activity Approved by MRD 0 0 0 88 11 83274 83 65.09 148.09

Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra 0 0 0 1 0 1592 1.59 1.22 2.81

Total 44 194 4 2154 2829001 2821.83 2208.76 5030.59

Table-2.5.7

DHEMAGI


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total









Any Other activity Approved by MRD 0 19 0 25 92.478 236566 73.24 47.57 120.81


Total 346 763 308 3572 5878312 7133.08 4288.14 11421.22

Table- 2.5.8

DHUBRI


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total











Total 1106 2120 1938 2425 12467803 12496.64 8322.1 20818.74

Table-2.5.9

DIBRUGARH


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current

Financial Year to Next

financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total









Any Other activity Approved by MRD 0 6 0 69 13622 204189 203.9 404.21 608.11


Total 12 126 42 1383 1612583 1590.45 1254.48 2844.93

Table-2.5.10

GOALPARA


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total











Total 375 1377 915 868 2399994 2400.08 1840.24 4240.32

Table-2.5.11

GOLAGHAT


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total






Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 3 0 3 1 6 47208 50.5 33.67 84.17





Total 281 332 455 1225 9588781 9903.91 6998.28 16902.19

Table-2.5.12

HAILAKANDI


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total




Drought Proofing 1 19 7 71 3091 101172 101.17 75.54 176.71




Land Development 1 57 14 148 7391 240471 241.26 182.08 423.34



Total 41 1174 297 1571 3743369 3764.64 2884.26 6648.9

Table -2.5.13

JORHAT


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total

Rural Connectivity 81 306 436 364 551.26 1583696 5660475.56 1083.54 5661559

Flood Control and Protection 6 21 141 131 309.1 443310 2252403.91 296.93 2252701

Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 3 21 179 119 1358426 333900 1998296.1 225.78 1998522

Drought Proofing 65 18 88 142 4057.44 257400 4176983.97 172.29 4177156



Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 10 66 184 160 1260343 433922 3488387.33 289.11 3488676

Land Development 6 28 94 115 281.6 325770 5862422.85 218.47 5862641



Total 177 479 1245 1317 3776284 23439414.5 2589.09 23442004

Table-2.5.15

KAMRUP (METRO)


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total






Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 0 1 1 0 4.5 12600 12.6 8.4 21





Total 414 144 473 185 3794760 3729.96 2486.8 6216.76

Table-2.5.16

KARBI ANGLONG


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage

On Material including

skilled and semiskilled

wages

Total

Rural Connectivity 292 1308 0 0 1246 3895000 3895.47 2993.99 6889.46


Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 153 971 0 0 195000 1835000 1835 1404.84 3239.84








Total 1065 5936 0 0

13616000 13661.52 10527.64 24189.16

Table-2.5.17

KARIMGANJ


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total



Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 193 122 265 118 395938.9 333856 291.61 147.39 439








Total 2769 971 3465 833 2902907 2809.61 2045.04 4854.65

Table-2.5.18

KOKRAJHAR


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total



Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 0 143 3 8135 1428548 722230 722.23 0 722.23




Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 0 107 4 4100 526406 290740 290.74 0 290.74




Total 403 5269 426 29689 17057500 17057.5 11371.67 28429.17

Table-2.5.19

LAKHIMPUR

Shelf of works Through Which Employment to

be Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year

No. of Works

Likely to Spill Over

From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total

Rural Connectivity 196 574 562 2004 2855.69 5537586 15006078.2 3760746.1 18766824

Flood Control and Protection 82 117 127 497 640.71 1516534 3421389.52 1865712.91 5287102

Water Conservation and Water Harvesting 47 101 141 1266 3705035 2083581 5476982.96 1117547.23 6594530

Drought Proofing 84 82 132 982 42706.12 1852627 5686016 1240645.92 6926662

Micro Irrigation Works 27 76 83 462 1403.576 983084 1034094.05 339418.18 1373512

Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 36 73 98 4810 2220.363 1153683 2944562.54 1413005.79 4357568


Land Development 106 237 293 2019 206291.4 2590471 1221494.31 2952710.65 4174205

Any Other activity Approved by MRD 1 123 57 452 105377.7 854922 60757.32 40995.83 101753.2

Bharat Nirman Rajiv Gandhi Sewa Kendra 2 1 3 3 2.5 10700 475200 316800 792000

Table-2.5.20

MARIGAON


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total











Total 568 2974 1038 3109 4079586 20114.22 3096.57 23210.79

Table-2.5.21

NAGAON


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total

Rural Connectivity 617 249 249 2040 2040 6282200 6120 4080 10200

Flood Control and Protection 95 96 96 604 962 1803900 1812.6 1208 3020.6



Micro Irrigation Works 6 18 18 526 2080 652800 631.2 420.8 1052

Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 0 0 0 1386 720 838800 838.8 547.2 1386

Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 5 0 5 523 3251000 1573000 1573 1042 2615




Total 840 719 724 8320 15868048 15730.25 10420.26 26150.51

Table-2.5.22

NALBARI


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total











Total 389 743 536 562 3559279 16234.89 2361.44 18596.33

Table-2.5.23

NORTH CACHAR HILLS


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total







Renovation of Traditional Water bodies 12 75 16 20 50 54000 54 36 90




Total 128 674 371 1056 2908400 2854.35 1938.91 4793.26

Table-2.5.24

SIVASAGAR


Provided

Total No. of Spill

over Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Spill Over From

Current Financial


No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total





Micro Irrigation Works 9 14 0 8 17.86 19800 19.8 13.2 33






Total 94 318 1 512 1200893 1216.04 810.68 2026.72

Table-2.5.25

Sonitpur.


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total











Total 12 1758 792 2114 4976758 4977.1 15944 20921.1

Table-2.5.26

Tinsukia.


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total











Total 47 333 302 479 2429220 2429.22 1591.75 4020.97

Table-2.5.27

UDALGURI


Provided


Works From

Previous year

Total No. of New

Works Taken up in

Current Year


Over From Current


financial

No. Of New


year

Benefit Achieved

Unit

Persondays To be

Generated


On Unskilled Wage


Total




Drought Proofing 63 381 0 484 551.96 465942 466 365.59 831.59


Provision of Irrigation facility to Land Owned by 0 0 0 2014 283.98 141974 142 83.65 225.65





Total 389 2524 0 5293 3655080 3655.18 2776.22 6431.4

occupied the lowest position by projectin to generate 12.01 lakh person days only. The

highest total estimated cost of Rs.35927 lakh was incurred on unskilled wage in

Lakhimpur district and the lowest amount of Rs. 1590.45 was incurred in Dibrugarh

district. The highest estimated cost on material including skill and semi skilled wages was

of Rs. 13320565.54 in Lakhimpur district and the lowest amount of Rs. 810.68 was in

Sivasagar district. Combing estimated costs, the highest amount of Rs.49248121.31 lakh

was in Lakhimpur and the lowest amount of Rs.2026.72 in Sivsagar in the reference year.

It may be happened due to the prevailing poor road connectivity in the villages of Assam

for which it assumed top priority among all the ongoing schemes under NREGA. For this

very reason, the highest estimated cost also incurred on unskilled wages and on materials

including the wage of skilled and semi-skilled workers under this scheme. However, the

ratio of wages and material has been fixed at 60:40 as per specification.

2.6 Summary of the Chapter

This summary is based on secondary level information collected from website of

the NREGA. It was practically lunched on 2nd Feb, 2006 in most backward districts of

Assam which was termed as phase-I. In the phase I, it covers 7 districts. In phase II, it

covers 6 districts and in phase III, it covers remaining 14 districts of Assam. During the

study there are all together10 schemes going on under state NREGA. Among all the

programmes, the scheme Rural Connectivity got top priority. It may be happened due to

the prevailing poor road connectivity in the villages of Assam for which it assumed top

priority among all the ongoing schemes under NREGA. It seems that all the ongoing

works are getting weightage on the basis of priority except the last two works (as per

table). Much variation of cast components occurred in work participation from district to

district. It might be happened due to dominant demographic structure of particular group.

Women participation was at lower level in almost all the districts than the targeted limit

of at least 33 per cent. A very few households in the districts could complete the target of

100 days in a year. It might be happened for four definite reasons. Firstly Assam is

situated in heavy rainfall zone which becomes a major hindrance in starting the work

timely. Secondly, the wage rate is lower than the market rate and thirdly labour scarcity

during the time of work and fourthly administrative delay in starting the work or more

demand for employment compel to engage more labour than required labour against a

particular work. To ensure transparency, social auditing and inspection of NREGA work

was done in each sample districts. A little bit of variations in expenditure in payment of

wages and material cost were found each sample district. No district is able to maintain

this ratio of 60:40.

*****

96

96

CHAPTER - III

HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS AND THEIR INCOME

AND CONSUMPTION PATTERN

In this chapter a comparative analysis has been made to focus the socio-

economic characteristics of the beneficiary and non beneficiary sample households on

the observation of some important indicators. It would bring out the factors affecting

on participation and non participation in NREGA.

3.1 Household profile of the respondents

There were all together 200 beneficiaries and 50 non beneficiaries households

in the 5 selected districts in Assam – Sonitpur from the north, Cachar form south,

Dibrugarh from the east, Bongaigaon from the west and Nagaon from the central

location of the state. Selection of sample has been done as per the given directives by

the co-ordinating centre.

Demographic profile of the respondents combining all concerned districts is

presented in Table-3.1. Average household size is 4.92 in case of beneficiaries and

5.22 in case of non beneficiaries. Combining both, it stands at an average of 4.98.

Average number of earners per beneficiary household is about 1.52 and it is

about 1.62 in case of non beneficiaries and in aggregate, it stands at 1.54.

From the point of gender differences, male population is about 54.02 per cent

and 52.49 per cent in respect of beneficiaries and non beneficiaries respectively.

Female population stands at 45.98 per cent in respect of beneficiaries it stands at

47.51 per cent in respect of non-beneficiaries. In aggregate, it stands at 53.70 for male

and 46.30 for female population. Male population is dominating over female

population in both the categories.

Age group classification determines whether the population trend is on

increasing side or decreasing side. More population in minor group indicates a trend

of high growth rate of population and a higher population in workable age group is an

opportunity for a nation for economic growth if sufficient provision can be created to

utilize all of them as human resource or it would be a course. Population above 60 is

considered as old citizens. It has been observed that expectancy of life is increasing

along with improvement of medical care. Therefore they cannot be treated as non

working population and they have more working efficiency than that of below age

Table - 3.1

Demographic profile of the respondents (% or households) Characteristics Beneficiaries % Non

beneficiaries % Aggregate %

No. of HH 200 50 250

Households size (numbers) 4.92 5.22 4.98

Average numbers of earners 303 (1.57) 81 (1.62) 384 (1.54)

Gender Male 531 54.02 137 52.49 668 53.70

Female 452 45.98 124 47.51 576 46.30

Age groups < 16 292 29.70 83 31.80 375 30.14

16 - 60 620 63.07 157 60.15 777 62.46

> 60 71 7.22 21 8.05 92 7.40

Identity of Head 181 90.50 47 94.00 228 91.20

respondent Others 19 9.50 3 6.00 22 8.80

Education Illiterate 179 18.21 51 19.54 230 18.49

status Up to primary 552 56.15 118 45.21 670 53.86

Up to secondary 210 21.36 79 30.27 289 23.23

Up to graduate 38 3.87 11 4.21 49 3.94

Above graduate 4 0.41 2 0.77 6 0.48

Caste SC 68 34.00 17 34.00 85 34.00

ST 21 10.50 5 10.00 26 10.40

OBC 52 26.00 18 36.00 70 28.00

General 59 29.50 10 20.00 69 27.60

Card holders AAY 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

BPL 148 74.00 22 44.00 170 68.00

APL 38 19.00 20 40.00 58 23.20

None 14 7.00 8 16.00 22 8.80

Decision maker Male 194 97.00 50 100.00 244 97.60

Female 6 3.00 0 0.00 6 2.40

Main occupation Farming 16 8.00 11 22.00 27 10.80

Self business 6 3.00 2 4.00 8 3.20

Salaried/pensioners 19 9.50 7 14.00 26 10.40

Wage earners 159 79.50 30 60.00 189 75.60

Involved in migration during year 2009 121 60.50 41 82.00 162 64.80

groups. In rural areas, a major problem arises from the unskilled workable population

as their job opportunity is shrinking on account of rapid development of machinery/

equipment. This segment of population cannot be neglected as they represent a

sizeable share of population. It is a major problem in rural areas of all the states of the

country. The NREGA is a ray of hope for this section people and it is an opportunity

for them to take part in the development agenda of the country with dignity. Looking

at the demographic profile of the sample households (Table-3.1), age group wise

population are 29.70 per cent in below 16 years, 63.07 per cent in 16-60 group and

7.22 per cent above 60 years in respect of beneficiaries while it is 31.80 per cent in

below 16 years, 60.15 per cent in 16-60 group and 8.05 per cent in above 60 years in

case of non beneficiaries. In aggregate population, it is 30.14 per cent in below 16

years, 62.46 per cent in 16-60 group and 7.40 per cent in above 60 years. The

population in the age group 16-60 is significantly higher as compared to other age

groups.

98

98

Identity of the respondent who provided the required information in the

prescribed scheduled were categorized into Head and Others. Head means head of the

family and other means any adult family member with the ability to provide required

information other than Head. Of the 200 beneficiaries’ households, 90.50 per cent

respondent belonged to Head and 9.50 per cent belonged to others and of the 50 non

beneficiary households, 94.00 per cent respondents belonged to Head and 6.00 per

cent belonged to others. In aggregate, 91.20 per cent respondents belonged to head

and the rest 8.80 per cent belonged to others. Percentages of Head respondents has

increased on account of the fact that a special care was taken at the time of field

investigation to get the right information about the family but that did not mean that

information collected from other was not proper. Special care had also been taken in

filling up the questions in the prescribed schedule.

Educational status is a major socio-economic indicator of a family. Most of

the families were very poor living below poverty line. Health hazard was also very

common among them on account of inadequate nutrition and sanitation. It seemed

that they were not able to afford minimum expenditure in education for the family.

Obtaining higher education was simply impossible for them. Still it has been

observed that each sample households was very much conscious about their

education. They were trying to send their children to school. In this regard, the role of

ongoing educational schemes cannot be denied. Table 3.1 presents a vivid picture of

the educational status of the beneficiaries and the non beneficiaries. Of the total

population, illiteracy rate was 18.21 per cent for beneficiaries and 19.54 per cent for

non beneficiaries and 18.49 per cent in aggregate. Up to primary education, the

literary rate was 56.15 per cent for beneficiaries and 45.21 per cent for non

beneficiaries and 53.86 per cent in aggregate. Up to secondary education, the literary

rate is 21.36 per cent for beneficiaries and 30.27 per cent for non beneficiaries and

23.23 per cent in aggregate. Up to graduate education, the literary rate is 3.87 per cent

for beneficiaries and 4.21 per cent for non beneficiaries and 3.94 per cent in aggregate

and above graduate; the literary rate is 0.41 per cent for beneficiaries and 0.77 per

cent for non beneficiaries and 0.48 per cent in aggregate.

As per guide lines of the study, samples are to be drawn ratio proportionately

from each of the selected village for beneficiaries and non beneficiaries so that each

caste component get equal representation in the study. It is worthwhile to mention

here that a particular clan usually lives in a village of Assam. Inhabitant of mixed

caste component in a village is not found. Therefore, much attention has been paid in

selection of the villages in each district to cover all the caste components to get an

aggregate picture. Of the 200 beneficiary respondents, 34 per cent belonged to SC,

10.50 per cent belonged to ST, 26.00 per cent belonged to OBC and 29.50 per cent

belonged to General and in case of non beneficiary, 34 per cent belong to SC, 10 per

cent belonged to ST; 36 per cent belonged to OBC and 20.00 per cent belonged to

General. In aggregate, 34 per cent belonged to SC, 10.40 per cent belonged to ST; 28

per cent belonged to OBC and 27.60 per cent belonged to General categories.

The Department of Food and Public Distribution also takes the responsibility

of food economy of the states of the country. It undertakes various schemes for

distribution of food grains at subsidized rate through fair price shops among the card

holders. States receives such food grains from the Central Pool. There are three types

of card holders-Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY), Below Poverty Line (BPL) and

Above Poverty Line (APL).

The Government lunched the AAY for the poorest of the poor on 25

December, 2000.Under this scheme, 25 kg of food-grains was made available to

each eligible family per month at highly subsidized rate of Rs. 2.00 per kg for wheat

and Rs.3.00 per kg for rice. This quantity has been enhanced from 25 kg to 35 kg

from 1st April 2002.

The scheme BPL has been implemented in Assam since June, 1997 covering

12, 02,000 families fulfilling the target as fixed by the Government of India. Under

this scheme, the selected BPL families have been provided with 33 kg of rice per

family per month at the subsidized rate of Rs.6.27 to Rs. 6.67 per kg. In addition to

rice, these families are also provided with wheat product, Subsidized Kerosene (S.K.)

Oil, levy sugar and salt through BPL cards. It may be mentioned here that there is a

hue and cry in the local news papers of the state that there were some flaw in selection

procedures of BPL families.

The APL card scheme normally covers the middle class/creamy layer families

of the society as per guide lines of the government of India. At present there are about

42.94 lakh APL families covering population of 214.70 lakh in the state. These

families have been provided with APL rice, wheat products, Levy sugar, S.K

(Subsidized Kerosin) Oil and Iodized salt in every month through fair price shops of

the government.

100

100

During field survey, among the 200 beneficiary respondents and 50 non

beneficiary respondents, no card holders have been found under AAY. From the

observation it does not mean that among the respondents, there is none the poorest of

the poor among them. It seems that the scheme is not able to reach them for some

reasons for which state is not able activate the scheme properly.

Of the total number of beneficiary respondents, there did 148 respondents

under BPL card holders constitute 74 per cent and of the total number of non

beneficiaries, there were 22 respondents under the BPL card holders constituting

44.00 per cent which resulted in 68.00 per cent aggregate. It indicates that a higher

percentage of job card holders are living under BPL in case of beneficiary

respondents than non beneficiary respondents.

Similarly, there were 19 per cent and 40 per cent were APL card holders in

case of beneficiary and non beneficiary respondents respectively with an aggregate of

23.20 per cent.

The percentage of respondents who did not posses any card was 7.00 per cent

and 16 per cent in case in case of beneficiary and non beneficiary respondents

respectively with an aggregate 8.80 per cent.

The role of male is significantly high as decision maker of the family. It was

97.00 per cent and 100.00 per cent in respect of beneficiary and non beneficiary

respondents with an aggregate of 97.60 per cent.

Regarding migration of workers, 60.80 per cent occurred in case of

beneficiaries and it was 82.00 per cent in case of non beneficiaries. In aggregate, it

stood at 64.80 per cent.

3.2 Main Occupation

The main occupations of the beneficiary respondents were farming, self

business, salaried/pensioners and wage earners (Table- 3.1). Wage earners were the

highest with 79.50 per cent followed by salaried/pensioners 9.50 per cent, farming

8.00 per cent, and self business 3.00 per cent. In case of non beneficiary respondents,

the highest 60.00 per cent were found as wage earners followed by farming 22.00 per

cent, salaried/pensioners 14.00 per cent and self business 4.00 per cent respectively.

Here, occupations of the non beneficiary respondents were at higher side in respect of

farming, self business and salaried/pensioners as compared to beneficiary

respondents. The wage earners were at significantly higher side in case of beneficiary

respondents. In aggregate, the highest (75.60%) number of respondents earned their

Table 3.2

Main Occupation (% to total man-days)

Occupations Beneficiaries % Non % Aggregate %

beneficiaries

Agricultural casual labour 1,847 (39) 2.66 1,340 (31) 7.73 3,187 (70) 3.68

Non agricultural casual labour 28,485 (150) 41.09 6,283 (50) 36.27 34,768 (200) 40.13

Work for public work

programmes other then NREGA

- - - - - -

Self employed in non farming 8,494 (41) 12.25 5,098 (32) 29.43 13,592 (73) 15.69

Self employed in agriculture 4,506 (64) 6.50 388 (27) 2.24 4,894 (91) 5.65

Self employed in livestock 6,744 (72) 9.73 635 (42) 3.66 7,379(114) 8.52

Regular/salary job 6,935 (19) 10.01 2,555 (7) 14.75 9,490 (26) 10.95

Worked as a migrant worker 2,662 (121) 3.84 1025(41) 5.92 3687 (162) 4.25

Worked under NREGA 9,646 (200) 13.92 0 0.00 9,646 (200) 11.13

Any other work

Total 69,319 100.00 17324 100.00 86,643 100.00

Note:

(i) While calculating man days only working members of the households were considered

excluding dependent, household work, students and others

(ii) For salaried/pensioners the working days are considered as 365 man days per person per

annum

(iii) For self employment in agriculture/livestock, man days are calculated as (days*number of

hours/8)

(iv) Figures within brackets nos. of hh in the respective column.

livelihood as wage earners followed by 10.80 per cent in farming, 10.40 per cent as

salaried/pensioners and 3.20 per cent as self businesses. Migration of workers were

recorded in 121(60.50%) and 41(82.00) households in case of beneficiaries and non

beneficiaries, respectively. Combining both, the aggregate percentage stood at 64.80

per cent.

Table 3.2 gives occupation wise man days with percentage to total man days

of the working population of the households for beneficiaries and non beneficiaries

during the reference year. In case of beneficiaries, the highest man days (28,485)

with 41.09 per cent to the total 69,319 man days had been observed against Non

agricultural Casual Labour followed by 13.92 per cent in Work under NREGA, 12.25

per cent in Self Employed Non Farming, 10.01 per cent in Regular / Salaried job, 9.73

per cent in Self Employed in Livestock, 6.50 per cent in Self Employed in Agriculture

3.84 per cent in migrant workers and 2.66 per cent in Agricultural Casual Labour. In

case of non beneficiaries, the highest man days (6,283) with 36.27 per cent to total

17,324 man days have also been observed against Non agricultural casual labour

followed by 29.43 per cent in Self Employed Non Farming, 14.75 per cent in Regular

/ Salaried job, 7.73 per cent Agricultural Casual Labour, 5.92 per cent in Migrant

Workers, 3.66 per cent in Self Employed in Livestock and 2.24 per cent in Self

102

102

Employed in Agriculture respectively. In both the cases, almost similar trend of

working days has been reflected by the table. In aggregate, the highest number of man

days (40.13%) were found in Non agricultural Casual labour followed by 15.69 per

cent in Self Employed Non Farming, 11.13 per cent in Work under NREGA. 10.95

per cent in Regular / Salaried job, 8.52 per cent in Self Employed in Livestock and

5.65 per cent in Self Employed in Agriculture, 4.25 per cent in migrant workers and

3.68 per cent Agricultural Casual Labourers.

3.3 Household net Income

Due to implementation of NREGA, there was an additional increase of Rs

4,154 in average house hold income of beneficiary households. Per household net

income covering beneficiaries and non beneficiaries by different occupations are

shown in Table-3.3. The coefficient of variations were found much greater in all the

Table 3.3

Household net income (Annual) (Rs. Per household) Average CV Average CV Average CV

Occupations income (across income (across income (across

HH) HH) HH)

Beneficiaries Non beneficiaries Aggregate

Income from work under NREGA 4,154 47.62 0.00 0.00 4,154 47.62

Percentage (11.11) 0.00 0.00 (9.18)

Income from wages in agriculture 3,118 60.90 2,581 35.34 2,922 55.82

Percentage (1.67) (3.78) (2.03)

Income from wages in non agriculture 16,826 52.33 11,107 43.51 15,396 54.39

Percentage (33.75) (35.34) (34.03)

Income from wages in PWP 0 0 0 0 0 0

Percentage

Income from wages as migrant workers 2,168 66.22 2,402 79.71 2227 70.67

Percentage (3.51) (6.27) (3.99)

Income from self employed in non

farming

25,888 54.69 20,271 69.23 24,764 57.79

Percentage (19.39) (18.06) (19.16)

Income from agriculture/livestock 10,735 87.31 8,043 67.46 10,012 85.41

Percentage (7.030 (9.21) (7.41)

Income from regular job/salary/pension 62,859 80.07 61,357 20.70 62,559 76.10

Percentage (23.54) (27.33) (24.20)

Income from sale of assets/rent/transfer

Percentage

0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 37,387 31,425 36,195

Percentage ( 100.00) (100) (100)

Note : Figures in parentheses are respective percentage of total income.

*Income from wages in non agriculture/income from migrant workers is calculated after subtracting the

transportation cost, while income from agriculture also includes income from hiring out assets ,if any.

occupations which indicated that income distribution of the households were less

uniform ,less stable and less homogeneous. Similar trends of income were noticed for

beneficiary and non beneficiary as well. The highest annual per household income of

Rs. 62,859(23.54%) and Rs. 61,357(27.33%) were found from the occupation of

Regular Job/ Salary/ Pensioner for beneficiary and non beneficiary respectively with

an aggregate income of Rs. 62,559(24.20%) followed by annual income of Rs

25,888(19.39%) for beneficiary and Rs.20,271(18.06 %) for non beneficiaries from

Self Employed in Non Farming occupation with an aggregate income of Rs.

24,7649(19.16%), Rs.16,826(33.75%) for beneficiary and Rs. 11,017(35.34%) for

non beneficiary with aggregate income of Rs 15,396 from wages in Non Agriculture,

Rs.10,735(7.03%) for beneficiary and Rs.8,043(9.21%) for non beneficiary with an

aggregate income of Rs.10,012(7.41%) from Agriculture /Livestock,

Rs,4,154(11.11%) for beneficiary from NREGA and Rs.3,118(1.67%) from

agricultural wages for beneficiary, Rs.2,581(3.78%) for non beneficiary with an

aggregate income of Rs.2,922(2.03%) and Rs.2,168(3.51%) for beneficiary and

Rs.2,402(6.27%) for non beneficiary with an aggregate income of Rs.2,227(3.99%)

from Wages As Migrant Workers.

3.4.a Household consumption

Rice is the principal food of Assam. Almost each and every household takes

two major meals in a day where rice is the major item. Wheat is an occasional food

item usually taken as breakfast. Other cereals are also taken proportionately with rice.

It may be mentioned here that quantities of other items solely depend upon the income

of the house hold. It was also reported that one meal (lunch) is usually provided by

the wage bearer at free of cost which curtails the expenditure in food of the wage

earners.

Per capita per month Consumption of food items of the sample households

presented in Table 3.4a. Per capita per month consumption of rice was at 10.413 Kg.

for beneficiary and 10.544 Kg. for non beneficiary with an aggregate amount of

10.440 kg which was below to the NSS data12.12kg. for 1993-94and 13.20kg for

1999-00.Incase of total cereal consumption, it stood at 11.796 kg for

beneficiaries,11.450 kg for non beneficiaries with an aggregate consumption of

11.723 kg. And it was 12.69 kg and 13.70 kg to the NSS data for 1993-94 and 1999-

00 respectively. Consumption of vegetables was at 6.540 kg for beneficiary and 8.670

kg for non beneficiary with an aggregate consumption of 6.987 kg. In both the cases,

consumptions were much higher than NSS data. In case of edible oil, consumption

was at 0.544 lit. for beneficiary and 0.498 lit for non beneficiary with an aggregate

consumption of 0.535 lit which were also in higher side than the NSS data for the

reference years. In case of protein rich items like poultry meat, egg. fish, etc., per

capita per month consumption was at 0.330 kg for beneficiary and 0.420 kg for non

104

104

beneficiary with an aggregate consumption of 0.349 kg which were also in much

higher side than the NSS data for the reference years. There was no report of any

expenditure under the item “Confectionary”.

Table 3.4.a

Household consumption of food items (kgs. Per capita per month) (Quantity in Kgs.)

Items

Beneficiaries

Non

beneficiaries Aggregate

NSS

1993-94

NSS

1999-00

NSS

2003-04(In

Rs.)

Rice 10.413 10.544 10.440 12.12 12.630 NA

Wheat 1.383 0.906 1.283 0.57 0.570 NA Other cereals 0.000 0.000 0.000 NA 0.00 NA Total cereals 11.795 11.450 11.723 12.69 13.20 NA Total pulses 0.533 0.464 0.518 0.490 0.510 NA Sugar 0.491 0.455 0.484 0.420 0.410 NA Edible oil * 0.544 0.498 0.535 0.300 0.350 NA Liquid milk * 1.122 0.801 1.054 1.210 1.140 NA Milk products 0.016 0.021 0.017 - 0.00 NA Spices 0.240 0.223 0.237 0.105 0.104 NA Poultry - meat 0.330 0.420 0.349 0.150 0.140 NA Fruits 0.326 0.390 0.340 0.050 0.00 NA Vegetables 6.540 8.670 6.987 2.380 0.00 NA Confectionery 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 NA Edible oil and liquid milk are in liters

Note :Rice ( Rs.14.12/kg.), Wheat (Rs.17.12/kg.), Total pulses (Rs.45.12/kg.), Sugar (Rs.16.45/kg.)

Edible oil (Rs. 45.45/Lit), Milk (Rs.15.50/lit), Spices (Rs.90.00/kg), Poultry-meat (Rs.120.00/kg)

Fruits (Rs. 32.00/kg) and Vegetable (Rs. 14.40/kg)

3.4b Monthly consumption expenditure of households

Monthly per capita consumption expenditure on food and non food items for

beneficiaries and non beneficiaries were worked out along with coefficient of

variation of and are presented in Table 3.4b. The NSS data on per capita consumption

expenditure is also incorporated herewith for a comparative analysis of the state as a

whole. Coefficient of variation among each item is very high for beneficiaries as well

as non beneficiaries but there exists a similarity in consumption pattern of each food

and non food item across the sample households. Per capita monthly consumption

expenditure in total food was of Rs. 444.62 for beneficiaries and Rs. 467.48 for non

beneficiaries while per capita per month non food expenditure was of Rs.144.22 for

beneficiaries and Rs 71.45 for non beneficiaries. Food and non- food expenditure

Puting together, it stood at Rs. 588.84 for beneficiaries and Rs.538.93 for non

beneficiaries. Per capita per month expenditure was marginally higher in respect of

beneficiaries might be due to impact of NREGA. In aggregate, per capita expenditure

exceeded the expenditure recorded NSS data for 2003-04. It happened due to time gap

between observed data and NSS data.

Table - 3.4 b Monthly consumption expenditure of households

(Valu in Rs.)

Items

Monthly Coeffi- Monthly Coeffi- Monthly Coeffi- NSS

2003-04

(Rs.)

NSS

2004-05

(Rs.)

per capita cient of per capita cient of per capita cient of (Rs.) variation (Rs.) variation (Rs.) variation

Beneficiaries Non beneficiaries Aggregate

Food items Rice 167.86 31.85 169.97 26.47 168.30 30.11 126.29 -

% (28.51) (31.54) (29.10)

Wheat 25.05 51.72 16.42 54.21 23.24 49.90 5.63 -

% (4.25) (3.05) (4.02)

Other cereals 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -

% (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Total cereals 192.91 29.75 186.39 24.95 191.54 28.76 131.95 134.81

% (32.76) (34.59) (33.12)

Total pulses 24.03 46.82 20.92 47.29 23.38 42.79 15.48 81.02

% (4.08) (3.88) (4.04)

Sugar 12.99 45.90 12.04 42.79 12.79 49.78 7.55 8.62

% (2.21) (2.23) (2.21)

Edible oil 25.82 47.16 23.63 46.01 25.37 47.56 0.00 26.58

% (4.39) (4.39) (4.39)

Milk & prods 19.66 60.29 15.37 56.97 18.76 65.01 19.71 23.75

% (3.34) (2.85) (3.24)

Spices 26.40 42.88 24.58 36.73 26.02 41.98 8.66 10.23

% (4.48) (4.56) (4.50)

Poultry - meat 64.35 54.95 81.90 88.19 68.03 58.01 47.65 55.01

% (10.93) (15.20) (11.76)

Fruits 10.45 44.79 12.48 41.27 10.87 44.21 5.91 5.31

% (1.77) (2.32) (1.88)

Vegetables 68.02 51.41 90.17 27.76 72.66 47.05 46.93 50.71

% (11.55) (16.73) (12.56)

Confectionery 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -

% (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Total food 444.62 39.11 467.48 28.19 449.42 36.78 0.00 396.04

% (75.51) (86.74) (77.70)

Non food items (365 days recall period)

Education 17.37 46.87 11.85 40.85 16.21 45.46 11.76 -

% (2.95) (2.20) (2.80)

Clothing 43.96 48.33 14.42 48.46 37.77 50.52 37.04 -

% (7.47) (2.68) (6.53)

Footwear 4.81 47.22 3.97 48.49 4.64 47.67 4.40 -

% (0.82) (0.74) (0.80)

Other items 19.75 87.54 7.45 28.76 17.17 74.89 0.00 -

% (3.35) (1.38) (2.97)

Fuel & light 58.33 48.87 33.76 33.97 53.17 50.30 46.04 -

% (9.91) (6.26) (9.19)

Total non

food 144.22 47.20 71.45 30.01 128.96 48.66 190.85

-

% (24.49) (13.26) (22.30)

Gross total 588.84 38.39 538.93 23.52 578.38 36.79 520.45 -

% (100.00) (100.00) (100.00)

Note : Figures in parentheses for total food and non food is respective percentages of gross total & figures for other

items among food and non food are respective percentages of food and non food total.

3.5 Variability (CV) and Gini ratios in income and consumption

Table 3.5 gives a comparative picture of variability in consumption and income

between beneficiaries and non beneficiaries against each item under consideration.

Average household income during the reference year was of Rs.36, 079 for

beneficiaries and Rs.29, 456 for non-beneficiaries with an aggregate income of Rs.

106

106

34,755. Average households consumption stood at Rs.21, 007 for beneficiaries and

Rs. 20,207 for non beneficiaries with an aggregate consumption of Rs.20,487.

Coefficient of variation in income across the households were found at 80.29 per cent

for beneficiaries and 71.78 per cent for non beneficiaries and aggregate coefficient of

variation stood at 79.73 per cent which indicates that there was much variation in

income among the households. The coefficients of variation in consumption were

found at 38.29 per cent for beneficiaries and 30.71 per cent for non beneficiaries with

an aggregate variation of 37.03. It indicates that the consumption pattern differed

Table 3.5

Variability in Consumption and income

Description

Beneficiary

Non

beneficiary

Total

Average households income during the reference year (Rs.) 36,079 29,456 34,755

Average households consumption during the reference year (Rs.) 21,007 20,207 20,847

Coefficient of variation in income across the households 80.29 71.78 79.73

Coefficient of variation in consumption across the households 38.29 30.71 37.03

Gini coefficient of income 29.19 41.69 31.26

Gini coefficient of consumption 16.25 17.16 16.17

more in beneficiaries than non beneficiaries. From the table it has been observed that

all the households had surplus income when compared with consumption; but it is to

be noted here that about 35 percent households had deficit income for beneficiaries

and about 40 per cent households had deficit income for non beneficiaries. Greater

coefficient variations also indicate the same fact. Gini ratio in income and expenditure

were also worked out for beneficiaries, not beneficiaries and at aggregate level. Gini

coefficient of income stood at 29.19 per cent for beneficiaries. 41.69 per cent for non

beneficiaries and 31.26 per cent in aggregate while in consumption, it stood at 16.25

per cent for beneficiaries. 17.16 per cent for non beneficiaries and 16.17 per cent in

aggregate.

3.6 Determinants of participation in NREGA – Functional analysis

An attempt is made here to analysis the determinants of participation in

NREGA using Logit modal of multiple regressions (Table-3.6). The result of the logit

regression revealed that only the variable asset and the constant had a significant

effect on the participation of households in NREGA and the rest of the variables

such as Employment Other than NREGA, HH Income Other than NREGA, HH Size, Dummy Land

ownership, Dummy BPL Card Holding, Dummy SC, Dummy ST, Dummy OBC did not reveal as

significant determinants of the household level participation in NREGA. The NREGA

Table-3.6

Determination of participation of NREGA (Logit function) (Dependent Variable: Participation (=1) and non participation (=0) in NREGA)

Variables Coefficient t" value

Employment Other than NREGA 0.08623

1.22699

HH Income Other than NREGA 0.00000

-0.38054

HH Size -0.04923 -0.98471

Dummy Land ownership 0.06314 0.47602

Value of Assets 0.00000*** -1.60298

Dummy BPL Card Holding -0.01306 -0.07977

Dummy SC 0.13443 0.79659

Dummy ST -0.04480 0.20561

Dummy OBC -0.05055 0.29427

Constant -4.62359* -14.06734

No. of observations 250

Log Likelihood function -125.1

χ2

591.3*

Cox & Snell - R2 0.075

Negelkerke - R2 0.119

Note: * indicates 1% level, ** indicates 5% level, *** indicate 10% level

helped workers in creation of household assets as they got the money at a time after a

week or fortnightly and it can be considered as forced saving as the transaction is

done through bank and post office. It also helped them to create household assets. The

worked out Chi-square was found significant at 1% probability level.

Table-3.7

Determination of participation of NREGA (OLS) (Dependent Variable: No. of days per HH worked in NREGA)


Employment Other then NREGA -1.79052 -1.23335

HH Income Other then NREGA -0.00020* -3.33523

HH Size 2.18004** 1.92951

Dummy Land ownership 1.79151 0.57896

Value of Assets 6.4569E-05*** 1.28627

Dummy BPL Card Holding -4.11172 -1.05553

Dummy SC 4.54488 1.19660

Dummy ST 13.05740* 2.38519

Dummy OBC 7.07329** 1.72008

Constant 43.13490* 6.03251

No. of observations 200

F 2.35010

R2 0.10017

Note: *, ** and *** indicate Significant at 1%, 5% and 10% Probability level respectively.

In addition to logit regression analysis, two OLS methods of multiple regressions

were also worked for determination of participation of NREGA using numbers of

days worked in NREGA as household level as well as the member level as dependent

variable respectively in Table-3.7 & 3.8. From the Table-3.7, it has been observed

108

108

Table-3.8

Determination of participation of NREGA (OLS) (Dependent Variable: No. of days per member worked in NREGA)


Wage rate NERGA 0.10488 0.61293

Age -0.16052 -1.24439

Education -0.36089 -0.13574

HH size 1.05485* 1.01360

Dummy BPL -1.24225 -0.33246

Dummy Sex 5.43351*** 1.37305

Dummy SC 0.46977 0.11689

Dummy ST 10.73182** 1.91514

Dummy OBC 2.85400 0.68398

Constant 29.85465** 1.79941

No. of Observations 200

F 0.98108

R2 0.04441

Note: * indicates 1% level, ** indicates 5% level, *** indicate 10% level

that HH Income Other then NREGA, HH Size, Value of Assets, Dummy ST, Dummy

OBC and Constant had a significant effect on dependent variable. But positive effects

were found against HH Size, value of assets, Dummy ST, Dummy OBC and

Constant. From the Table 3.8, positive significant effects were found in case of the

variables HH size, gender, Dummy ST and constant.


This chapter was based on primary level data collected from 5 sample

districts covering 5 zones of the state viz, Bongaigaon from west, Cachar from south,

Dibrugarh from east, Nagaon from central and Sonitpur from north. Alltogether 200

sample beneficiaries and 50 non beneficiaries were interviewed for the purpose of the

study. There were 40 beneficiaries and 10 non beneficiaries in each of the district,

under study. Average house hold size was 4.92 for beneficiaries and 5.22 for non

beneficiaries. Male and female ratio was 54.02: 45.98. Literacy rate was 81.79 per

cent for beneficiaries and 80.46 per cent for non beneficiaries. SC was the dominant

caste component for beneficiaries while OBC was the dominant cast component for

non beneficiaries. BPL card holder is 74 per cent in case of beneficiaries and it was of

44 per cent in case of non beneficiaries. Role of male counterpart was dominant in

major decisions of any familial matters. About 80 per cent of the beneficiary

households earned their livelihood as wage laborers and it was 60 per cent for non

beneficiaries. Migration of workers existed among the sample households. It was

about 60.50 per cent for beneficiaries and 82 per cent for non beneficiaries. In the

reference year, all the workers of the beneficiary families were found to put in 69,319

man days under different occupations. They could generate 13.92 per cent of

additional man days due to NERGA. The highest man day’s i.e 41.09 per cent was

found under the occupation of non agricultural casual labour. The coefficient of

variations were found much greater in all the occupations which indicated that income

distribution of the households were less uniform, less stable and less homogeneous.

Similar trends of income are seen for beneficiary and non beneficiary as well.

Monthly per capita consumption in food items was of Rs.444.62 for beneficiaries and

Rs.467.48 for non beneficiaries. In non food items, it was of Rs.144.22 for

beneficiaries and Rs. 7.45 for non beneficiaries. Combining both, it stood at Rs.

588.84 for beneficiaries and Rs.538.93 for non beneficiaries. In both the case

coefficients of variation were significantly high. Gini coefficient of income stood at

29.19 per cent for beneficiaries, 41.69 per cent for non beneficiaries and 31.26 per

cent in aggregate while in consumption it stood at 16.25 per cent for beneficiaries,

17.16 per cent for non beneficiaries and 16.17 per cent in aggregate. An attempt was

who made to analysis the determinants of participation in NREGA using logit modal

and OLS method of multiple regressions. In logit modal, only household asset showed

a significant effect on household participation in NREGA while in other two models

of OLS showed a positive significant effect on the dependent variables using number

of days worked at the household level in NREGA against the variables HH Size,

value of assets, Dummy ST, Dummy OBC and Constant while using dependent

variable as the member level, positive significant effect were found against the

variables HH size, gender and Dummy ST.

******

110

110

CHAPTER - IV

THE WORK PROFILE UNDER NREGA, WAGE STRUCTURE

AND MIGRATION ISSUES (Reference period – January to December’ 2009)

4.1 Work profile under NREGA

Work profile under NREGA has been given in Table 4.1. Number of members

per household employed in aggregate during the year was 1.45 persons in Bongaigaon

district, 1.45 persons in Cachar district, 1.23 persons in Dibrugarh district, 1.13

persons in Nagaon district and 1.00 persons in Sonitpur district with a state average of

1.25 combining all caste components of the sample districts. In each district on an

average 0.45 woman were employed per household.

In aggregate, number of days employed during the year combining all the

caste components was 36.10 days in Bongaigaon district, 52.28 days in Cachar

district, 55.30 days in Dibrugarh district, 55.73 days in Nagaon district and 41.75

days in Sonitpur district constituting 48.23 days for the state as a whole. Women

were employed for 9.28 days per household in the state combining all the sample

districts.

During field investigation, three different wage rates were obtained, in the

first part of the year, it was of Rs. 77; in the mid of the year it was raised to Rs.80 and

then it was revised again and raised to Rs100.00 per day. In aggregate, wage rate per

day, stood at Rs.86.33 in Bongaigaon district, Rs. 93.38 in Cachar district, Rs 87.64 in

Dibrugarh district, Rs. 80.65 in Nagaon district, and Rs.82.13 in Sonitpur district with

a state average of Rs.86.12.

4.2 How successful has been NREGA providing 100 day’s employment (to

registered families at their door steps)

Of 40 households in each sample district, only 5 registered households

(2.50%) has got 100 days employment; only 3 in Nagaon district (7.50%) while only

2 households (5.00%) could complete 100 days employment in Bongaigaon district.

No record of completion of 100 days employment was observed in the registered

households in the rest of the sample districts.

No much variation had been observed in average distance from the residence

to the work place. In aggregate, it was at 1.11 kms.

Table: 4.1

The work profile under NREGA (Reference period : Jan- Dec 2009)

Characteristics Dist-1 Dist-2 Dist-3 Dist-4 Dist-5 State

Bongaigaon Cachar Dibrugarh Nagaon Sonitpur

No. of Members Aggregate 1.45 1.45 1.23 1.13 1.00 1.25

Per HH

Employed General 0.25 0.54 0.18 0.25 0.43 0.33

during the year SC 0.73 0.58 0.34 0.39 0.25 0.46

ST 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.17 0.08 0.08

OBC 0.47 0.33 0.55 0.31 0.25 0.38

Men 0.65 0.75 0.90 0.88 0.85 0.81

Women 0.80 0.70 0.33 0.25 0.15 0.45

% of HH worked for 100 or

more days in a year 5.00 0.00 0.00 2.50 0.00 1.50

No. of days Per Aggregate 36.10 52.28 55.30 55.73 41.75 48.23

HH Employed General 5.35 19.70 10.65 11.75 16.83 12.86

during the year SC 19.55 24.60 14.35 20.30 8.98 17.56

ST 0.00 0.00 8.73 8.98 4.05 4.35

OBC 11.20 7.98 21.58 14.70 11.90 13.47

Men 21.95 38.53 51.00 46.23 37.05 38.95

Women 14.15 13.75 4.30 9.50 4.70 9.28

Wage Rate Aggregate 86.33 93.38 87.64 80.65 82.13 86.12

Obtained (Rs.) General 83.35 91.62 90.91 80.56 81.46 86.13

SC 89.62 94.61 88.74 80.00 83.60 88.03

ST 0.00 0.00 92.11 83.27 88.78 87.84

OBC 82.01 93.95 83.48 80.02 79.71 83.05

Men 87.94 92.78 88.43 80.65 82.20 86.20

Women 83.82 95.07 78.22 80.63 81.60 85.76

Average distance from

Residence to where Employed (in Kms.) 1.10 0.98 1.20 1.16 1.09 1.11

4.3 Nature of assets created and their durability (Table 4.2)

It has been observed, NREGA is giving more stress in paying wages to the

workers than the volume and quality of works. On the contrary, it is also difficult to

assess the quality of work by the non technical persons like us. From eye estimation,

it may be mentioned that the quality of work in some areas were not up to the mark.

As a result in some areas, it failed to create durable assets and wherever created, it

was reported that there is no as such provision for post care of the created assets under

NREGA. However, from the opinion of the interviewees, Dibrugarh district showed

better performance among the 5 sample districts in creating quality of assets created

through NREGA activity. Over all opinion, 32.50 per cent was found as “very good”,

47.00 per cent as “Good” and 20.00 per cent as “Bad”.

4.4 Wage differential under NREGA and its comparison with Minimum Wage Act:

The daily rates of minimum wages for agricultural workers fixed at

Rs.106.71 by the state administration of Assam under the Minimum Wage Act of

1948. (Agricultural Statistics at a glance, 2010, DES, MOA, GOI).As per the data

collected by the Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Assam, the

average daily wage rate for un-skilled labourer in rural areas were at Rs.84.65 for

field labour Ploughman,Rs.82.72 for herdsman,Rs.82.55(Man),Rs.66.76(Women) for

reaper and harvester and Rs.83.47(Man) and Rs. 66.60 (Women) for other

agricultural labourer in 2008-09.(Economic Survey, Assam,2009-10) while wage rate

of State NREGA on an average was found at Rs.86.56.

4.5 Wage differential in different activities, among beneficiaries and none

beneficiaries (Table 4.3)

Wage differential among different activities is presented in Table 4.3. Wage

rate did not show much difference between beneficiaries and non beneficiaries.

Female wage rates were lower in different occupations. Coefficient of variation in

respect female is much higher in case of beneficiaries as compared to non

beneficiaries. Wage rate of migrant workers was on higher side as compared to wage

rate under NREGA and coefficient of variation was also found lesser. In aggregate,

wage rate in agricultural

Table: 4.3

Wage differentials among different activities

Occupations Beneficiaries Non beneficiaries Aggregate

Average CV Average CV Average CV

Wage rate in agriculture Male 71.25 39.30 72.05 36.69 71.18 37.79

casual labour (Rs.) Female 64.11 60.31 59.21 25.04 63.24 64.69

Wage rate in non agri

casual labour (Rs.)

Male

Female

98.87

66.92

51.51

59.35

96.81

66.03

43.64

49.49

96.29

67.10

54.67

58.03

Wage rate in public work Male 78.00 41.00 80.00 44.21 79.00 42.75

programe (Rs.) Female 60.00 31.00 60.00 33.32 60.00 32.45

Wage rate earned by Male 98.57 25.10 96.10 22.15 97.33 23.67

migrant workers (Rs.) Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Wage rate under NREGA Male 86.12 46.99 0.00 0.00 86.12 46.99

(Rs.) Female 86.33 51.45 0.00 0.00 86.33 51.45

Any other work (Rs.) Male 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

casual labour were at Rs. 71.18 for male and Rs.63.24 for female; wage rate in non

agricultural casual labour were at Rs. 96.29 for male and Rs.67.10 for female; wage

rate earned by migrant worker was of Rs.97.33 and there was no report of migrant

female worker and wage rate under NREGA were at Rs. 86.12 for male and Rs.86.33

for female. There was no report of any workers of the households participating in

public work programme.

14

14

4.6 How has NREGA affected labour migration (labour migrating back into

village and migrated out of village), Direction of migration (rural to urban and

vice-a-versa)

Among the sample villages surveyed, out migration was observed in almost all

the villages; main reason being that NREGA was not able to provide employment to

all job card holders for all un skilled workers of the households. Besides, other

workers who did not participate in NREGA also migrated to nearby towns in search

of works. It was also reported that they opted for migration due to higher wage rate as

compared to that of NREGA. Of the total population (983), there were 447(45.57%)

workers in the beneficiary households and NREGA provided employment to

251(25.53%) workers only and that too for 48.23 days on an average for each

household during the reference year.

Table: 4.4

The Migration Incidents Recorded during the

Reference Period : Jan. - Dec. 2009

Characteristics

Dist 1

Bongaigaon Dist 2 Cachar

Dist 3 Dibrugarh

Dist 4 Nagaon

Dist 5 Sunitpur

State

No. of members migrated from the village because of not 0.30 0.53 0.38 0.65 0.85 0.54

getting work under NREGA even after registration (per hh)

No. of out migrated members returned back to village 0 0 0 0 0 0

because of getting work in NREGA (per households)

In the case some members returned Nearby village 0 0 0 0 0 0

back to the village to work under Nearby town 0 0 0 0 0 0

NREGA where were they earlier Some district 0 0 0 0 0 0

working (% of returned members) Some state 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other state 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other country 0 0 0 0 0 0

In the case some members returned Const/manufacturing/mining 0 0 0 0 0 0

back to the village to work under Trading/services and transport 0 0 0 0 0 0

NREGA which activity earlier Private work/self business 0 0 0 0 0 0

working in (% of returned members) Other government work 0 0 0 0 0 0

Agricultural labour 0 0 0 0 0 0

Any other 0 0 0 0 0 0

Year in which shifted (% of shifted Shifted last year 25.00 33.33 53.33 30.77 41.18 37.04

household) Shifted before last year 75.00 66.67 46.67 69.23 58.82 62.96

Is your family better off now compared to previous 0 0 0 0 0 0

occupation (% of shifted household) 0 0 0 0 0 0

The NREGA in the state is going at a very slow pace and still it was not in a

position to speed up its activity to provide the targeted employment of 100 days for

each house hold in the reference year. It was also reported that activity of NREGA in

the state was also seasonal on account of prevailing weather condition. Therefore,

migration of workers form the village was found to be a common phenomenon in the

sample areas. There was no report of labour migrating back into village for NREGA.

There was no report of female migrant workers. Table 4.4 revealed the migration

incidents recorded during the Reference period - Jan. - Dec. 2009. The overall

migration incidents were at 0.54 persons per household. They also reported that

migration depends upon the demand for unskilled labour and they felt that it is

decreasing on account of extensive use of modern machinery.


In aggregate, number of members per household employed during the year

was 1.25 persons in the state combining all caste components of the sample districts.

In each district on an average 0.45 woman was employed per household. In aggregate,

number of days employed during the year combining all the caste components of the

sample districts was 48.23 days in the state. Women were employed for 9.28 days per

household in the state combining all the sample districts. Of 200 sample households,

only 5 registered households got 100 days employment in the reference year.

During the field investigation, three different wage rates were obtained, in

the first part of the year, it was of Rs. 77.00; in the mid of the year it was raised to Rs.

80.00 and then it was revised again and raised to Rs. 100.00 per day. In aggregate,

wage rate of the state NREGA stood at Rs.86.56 per day. Wage differential were also

found under different occupations other than NREGA. Gender differences were much

distinct in wage rate. Wage rate in NREGA was dearer than agricultural casual

labourer, but the higher wage rate was found in case of non agricultural casual

labourer and migrant workers. It was observed that the state NERGA was giving more

emphasis in paying wages to the workers than the volume and quality of works to be

performed. From eye estimation, it may be mentioned here that the quality of work in

some areas were not up to the mark.

*****

16

16

CHAPTER – V

THE FUNCTIONING OF NREGA- QUALITATIVE ASPECTS

5.1 Household assets holdings

Household assets are one of the measuring sticks to judge the economic status

of a household. It helps to a great extent, to know whether they are living above the

poverty line or below the poverty line. Table 5.1 indicates assets holding picture of

the sample households for beneficiaries and non beneficiaries. Land is a permanent

asset of every household. Division of family reduces the size of holding of owned

land among all the households. At the same time, selling of land has also become a

very common phenomenon among the poor people whenever there is any financial

crisis ,which has resulted further reduction of the size of own land holding. It has been

observed that almost all the households possess homestead area. Only a few

households have extra crop land of their own. At present, land value is ever increasing

irrespective of its location. In general, land value is much higher near by the city or

township. Therefore land is the most valuable assets for beneficiaries and non

beneficiaries. Value of per household land holding stood at Rs. 33,473 (42.23%) for

beneficiaries and Rs. 24, 446 (39.96 %) for non beneficiaries with an aggregate value

of Rs.28,960 (41.14%); value of per household house property stood at Rs. 25,351

(31.98) for beneficiaries and Rs. 17,702(28.93%) for non beneficiaries with an

aggregate value of Rs 21,527 (30.58%); value of per household livestock stood at

Rs.1,368 (1.73%) for beneficiaries and Rs. 3,370(5.51%) non beneficiaries with an

aggregate value of Rs 2,369 (3.37%); value of per household agricultural implements

stood at Rs 3,231 (4.08%) for beneficiaries and Rs. 4,855 (7.94 %) non beneficiaries

with an aggregate value of Rs 4,043(5.74%); value of per household consumer assets

stood at Rs.1,151 (1.45%) for beneficiaries and Rs.1,000 (1.63%) for non

beneficiaries with an aggregate value of Rs. 1,076 (1.53%); value of per household

business assets stood at Rs. 3,209 (4.05%) for beneficiaries and Rs.4,680 (7.65%) for

non beneficiaries with an aggregate value of Rs. 4,112 (5.84%); value of per

household ornaments stood at Rs. 1,0762 (13.58%) for beneficiaries and Rs. 3,659

(5.98%) for non beneficiaries with an aggregate value of Rs. 7,211 (10.24%); value

of per household utensil stood at Rs. 487 (0.60%) for beneficiaries and Rs. 747

(1.22%) non beneficiaries with an aggregate value of Rs.617 (0.88%); value of per

household other assets stood at Rs.231 (0.30%) for beneficiaries and Rs.724 (1.18%)

non beneficiaries with an aggregate value of Rs.478 (0.68%). Total value of per

household assets stood at Rs.79,263 for beneficiaries and Rs.61,183 for non

beneficiaries with an aggregate value of Rs.70,393.

Table - 5.1

Assets holdings (Rs. Per households) Assets Beneficiary Non Aggregate

beneficiary

Land 33,473 (42.23) 24,446 (39.96) 28,960 (41.14)

House property 25,351 (31.98) 17,702 (28.93) 21.527 (30.58)

Live stock 1,368 (1.73) 3,370 (5.51) 2,369 (3.37)

Agricultural implements 3,231 (4.08) 4,855 (7.94) 4,043 (5.74)

Consumer assets 1,151 (1.45) 1,000 (1.63) 1,076 (1.53)

Business assets 3,209 (4.05) 4,680 (7.65) 4.112 (5.84)

Ornaments 10.,762 (13.58) 3,659 (5.98) 7,211 (10.24)

Utensils 487 (0.60) 747 (1.22) 617 (0.88)

Others 231 (0.30) 724 (1.18) 478 (0.68)

Total 79,263 (100) 61,183 (100) 70,393 (100)

Figures in parentheses indicate percentage to total

5.2 Households status on borrowings and their financial vulnerability

In this regard, sample households borrowed money from three different

sources. Rate of interest was found to be very high and that too, on monthly basis

(Table-5.2a). It was not less than 10 per cent per month. Per household loan stood at

Rs.2,215 in respect of beneficiary households while it was of Rs.4.400 in respect of

non beneficiary households. In aggregate, it stood at Rs.2, 652. While in case of

beneficiaries, the maximum amount of loan i.e.77.43 per cent of loan came from the

Traders-Cum-Money-Lenders and 22.57 per cent came from Commission Agent and

in case of non beneficiaries, the maximum loan i.e,59.09 per cent came from

Commission Agent and 40.91 per cent came from Friends/Relatives. Table 5.2a also

revealed the purpose of loan for beneficiaries and non beneficiaries. In aggregate, per

household took loan of Rs.88.00 (3.32%) for daily consumption, Rs.632.00 (23.83%)

for social ceremony, Rs.870.00 (32.81%) for purchasing productive assets like land,

livestock, etc., Rs.814.00 (30.69%) for construction of dwelling houses and Rs.248.00

(9.35%) for medical treatment. The higher percentage of loan for productive assets

was a good sign but high rate of interest that too on monthly basis was a matter of

concerned for repaying the debt in time.

18

18

Table 5.2b revealed the household strength for borrowings and other

household assets with which they can go for borrowing. In aggregate 15.75 per cent of

the households were in agreement against wage work with those whom they were

indebted.

Table - 5.2a Borrowing by sample households (Rs. Per households)

Occupations Beneficiary Non Aggregate

beneficiary

Source of Institutional loan (banks)

loan Traders-cum-Money Lenders 1,715 (77.43) 0 1,372(51.7)

Commission Agent 500 (22.57) 2,600 (59.09) 920 (34.69)

Landlord/Employer

Friends/Relatives 1,800 (40.91) 360(13.57)

Others

Total 2,215 (100) 4,400(100) 2652(100)

Purpose Daily consumption 110.00(4.97) 88.00(3.32)

of loan Social ceremony 500.00(22.57) 1.160(26.36) 632.00(23.83)

Purchase of land, livestock or 660.00(29.80) 1,710(38.86)

870.00(32.81)

other assets

Consumer durables

Construction of house 730.00(32.96) 1150(26.14) 814.00(30.69)

Health treatment 215.00 (9.70) 380(8.64) 248.00(9.35)

Others

Total 2,215(100) 4,400(100) 2,652

Rate of interest (percent per month) 10 10 10

Note : Figures within brackets Month indicate percentage to total.

Table - 5.2b

Households strength for borrowing and other household assets* (% of households)

Strength Beneficiary Non Aggregate

beneficiary

Doing wage work to those whom they are indebted 13.50 18.00 15.75

Availability of co-operative credit society in village 0.00 0.00 0.00

Family member being member of such society 0.00 0.00 0.00

Availability of informal credit society/SHG in village 40.50 38.00 39.25

Family member being member of such society 3.50 3.10 3.07

Having account in bank/post office/other institution 100.00 62.00 81.00

Having any stocks/bond/shares/other similar assets 0.00 0.00 0.00

Having life insurance policy 15.50 14.00 14.75

There was no report of having cooperative credit society in the study area. In

aggregate, 39.25 per cent of households had opportunity to take loan from informal

credit societies such as SHG; 40.50 per cent of beneficiaries and 38.00 per cent for

non-beneficiaries had advantage of availing loan from informal credit societies

(SHG). All the beneficiary households i.e. 100 per cent households had accounts in

bank, post office and other institution from they can go for borrowing. In case of non

beneficiaries households 62 .00 per cent had account in bank. In aggregate, it was of

81.00 per cent. There was no report of having any stocks/ bond/shares/ other similar

assets. There was report of having insurance policy for some households amongst in

both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries; it was 15.50 per cent and 14 .00 per cent

households for beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries, respectively. It happened as some

households have government employees.

5.3 Some qualitative aspects of NREGA

Qualitative aspects of NREGA as per guidelines of the coordinating centre are

presented in the form of tables from Table 5.3.1 to Table 5.3.6.

5.3.1 Job Card Issues and work application

Table 5.3.1 is related to Job Card Issues and work application. There was no

report of paying any fees, charges, or bribe to get job card at the time of issuance of

Job card i.e. 100 per cent of beneficiaries replied as ‘no’. Of the 200 beneficiaries of

the 5 sample districts, 22 per cent job cards did not have entries even though the job

card holders had worked under NREGA; 60 per cent of job cards were found with

incomplete entries no over writing was reported by the card holders and the

signature column of 60 per cent job card was found blank; 100 per cent job card

holder opined that they got employed for work on submission of application; 70 per

cent got work within 15 days from the date of application; there was no report of

unemployment allowance paid in case of failure to provide work within 15 days.

5.3.2 Payment of wages and related issues

Wage rate for men and women were same and wages were paid on daily basis;

work was measured by collective measurement; three types of opinion were observed

in wage payment and of this 70 per cent got wages within a fortnight; 20 per cent got

within a month and 10 per cent got wages in more than a month. Wage payment was

made through bank and post offices. The choice of institute agency mainly depended

upon its location from the work site. 50% of accounts were found in banks & 50% in

Post Office. Wage payment was done through individual and joint account; 95 per

cent were found as individual accounts and 5 per cent as joint accounts. Wages were

paid through bank and post office only. Regarding wage payment, 10 per cent

complained that there were delays in payment. There were no reports of wage paid

other than the minimum wage or any other complaints enumerated in (Table 5.3.1 and

5.3.2)

20

20

Table - 5.3.1

Qualitative questions related to functioning of NREGA (Percentage of hh)

Description Yes No Not sure

Job card Paid any fees/charges or bribe to get a job card 0 100 0

issuance The amount paid for job card (exorbitant) 0 0 0

The amount paid as bribe (exorbitant) 0 0 0

Irregularity in No entries were made even though the job card holder(s)

the job card had worked on NREGA 22 78 0

Some entries were incomplete , missing or fake 60 40 0

information was entered

Some entries had been over-writing 0 100 0

The signature column was blank or partly blank 60 40 0

Where was With the card holders 70 30 0

the card With Sarpanch or Sachiv 0 0 0

generally With contractor 0 0 0

kept With the gram rojgar sevak 30 70 0

Elsewhere 0 0 0

Work Are you employed in response to an application for work 100 0 0

application If applied, did you get work within 15 days of application 70 30 0

In case of failure to provide work within 15 days, is

unemployment allowance paid 0 100 0

Payment of Are the wage rates same for men and women 100 0 0

Wages Wage rates higher for men 0 100 0

Wage rates higher for women 0 100 0

Wage paid on "daily-wage" basis 100 0 0

Wage paid on "piece-rate task-wage" basis 0 100 0

Measurement Work was measured by individual's work 0 100 0

of work Work was measured by team measurement 0 100 0

Work was measured by collective measurement 100 0 0

Period of Wages were paid within a fortnight 70 30 0

wage Wages were paid within a month 20 80 0

Payment Wages were paid more than a month 10 90 0

Wages were paid after one year 0 0 0

Who made Sarpanch of Sachiv 0 0 0

the wage Post Office 50 0 0

Payment of Bank 50 0 0

Representative of line department 100 0 0

Other government official or any other 0 0 0

In case wage Bank account was on self's name 0 0 0

payment Spouse's name 0 0 0

made in Parent's name 0 0 0

the bank Children's name 0 0 0

Others 0 0 0

Individual account 95 5 0

Joint account 5 95 0

Did bank follow usual procedure of banking 100 0 0

In case Wages paid in front of all labourers 0 0 0

wages were Wages paid on the worksite 0 0 0

not paid Wages paid in Panchayat Bhawan 0 0 0

through Wages paid on other public/private place 0 0 0

bank Wages paid on some one's private residence 0 0 0

Table - 5.3. 2

Qualitative Questions related to functioning on NREGA (Percentage of hh)


Complaints There were delays in wage payments 10 90 0

regarding Wage paid less than the minimum wage 0 100 0

wage Wage paid less than asked for sign/thumb impression 0 100 0

payment Task was too much as compared to the wages paid 0 100 0

Faced problems in accessing post office/bank accounts 0 100 0

On what basis wages were calculated not clear 0 100 0

Others 0 100 0

Details of A Board/GP member gave details of the sanctioned

worksite amount, work dimensions and other requisite details 72 28 0

facilities The worksite had shade for periods of rest 100 0 0

Worksite had child care facility 100 0 0

Worksite had first aid kit/medicines 100 0 0

Monitoring Was there any authority to monitor the functioning of the 100 0 0

NREGA administrations

Any complaint lodge relating to worksite etc. to the

Gram Panchayat, Programme Officer or other officials 0 100 0

If yes, was any action taken on your complaint 0 0 0

Economic Work is very useful to the villagers 83 17 0

usefulness of Work is quite useful to the villagers 100 0 0

the work Work is not particularly useful to the villagers 100 0 0

Work is useless for the villagers 0 100 0

Nature of The structure created may last up to one year 20 75 5

assets and The structure created may last up to five year 20 80 0

their The structure created may last up to ten year 0 100 0

durability in The structure created may last more the ten years 0 100 0

which the Is it worth creating the structure 60 40 0

interviewee Was the structure created adequate 20 80 0

involved No, structure needed more attention to be able to last long 0 100 0

How has Did any your family members migrated out for job after 43 57 0

NREGA has implementation of NAREGA (year 2005 onwards) 0

affected If yes, only one member of the family migrated 54 46 0

labour Are wages higher in city or other states than NREGA 100 0 0

migration Any family members migrated back to village to work 0 100 0

under NREGA

If yes, only one member of the family migrated back 0 0 0

More than one member of the family migrated 0 0 0

Are wages higher in city or other states than NREGA 100 0 0

Any family members migrated back to village to work 0 100 0

under NREGA

If yes, only one member of the family migrated back 0 0 0

More than one member migrated as wage labourer with 12 88 0

dissatisfaction from NREGA

If yes, only one member of the family migrated 0 100 0

More than one member of the family migrated 100 0 0

22

22

Table - 5.3. 2 (Continued)

Respondents' Are respondent aware about NREGA implementation 100 0 0

awareness Right to apply for work and get employed within 15 days 72 28 0

about The work application procedure 21 79 0

NREGA Right to minimum wages 100 0 0

implement- The level of minimum wages 100 0 0

ation The wage calculation method 100 0 0

Right to the unemployment allowance 0 100 0

Minimum worksite facilities (drinking water, first aid,) 22 78 0

Mandatory availability of muster rolls at the worksite 37 63 0

The list of permissible works under the NREGA 0 100 0

5.3.3 Worksite facilities and economic usefulness of the work

To bring in transparency to the operation of the , the Board/GP members have

to give details of the sanctioned amount, work dimensions and others requisite details

to job card holders. In this regard, 72 per cent of the households responded opined as

“yes”. In case of worksite shade, child care facility and first aid kit/medicine, 100 per

cent opined in the affirmative .Regarding economic usefulness of the work, 83 per

cent had positive reply and 100 per cent replied that work was quite useful not only to

the villagers but also to others.

5.3.4 Monitoring of the work

All the job card holders were aware of the fact that there was an authority to

monitor the functioning of the NREGA administration. During field study, there was

no report of any complaint lodged relating to worksite, etc. to the GP, Programme

Officer or other officials.( Table 5.3.2).

5.3.5 Nature of assets created and their durability

In this regard, 20 percent of the total households opined that the structure

might last up to one year; 75 per cent responded in the negative, and 5 per cent opined

as not sure; 20 per cent opined that the structure might last up to five years; 20 per

cent opined that the structure created might not last up to five years; 60 per cent

opined it as worth creating; 20 per cent opined that the structure was adequate and all

the sample households opined that the structure needed more attention to be able to

last long (Table 5.3.2).

5.3.6 Labour migration and NREGA

The NREGA in sample districts in the reference year could not provide

targeted employment for 100 days. Moreover, most of the sample households had

more than one unskilled labour for which they were to migrate to nearby city or town

in search of work even after implementation of NREGA. In this regard 43 per cent

opined that their family member migrated out for job even after implementation of

NREGA; when it was asked whether only one member of family migrated, 54 per

cent opined that only one member migrated out for work to nearby city or town. In

case of wage rate, 100 per cent opined that wage rate was higher cities/town as

compared to NREGA. There was no record of any family member migrated back to

village to work under NREGA 12 per cent respondents had replied that at least one

member of the family migrated as wage labourer with dissatisfaction from NREGA.

5.3.7 Respondents’ awareness about NREGA implementation

In this regard, 100 per cent of the respondents opined that they were aware of

NREGA implementation; 72 per cent were aware of the right to apply for work and to

get a job within 15 days ; only 21 per cent knew the work application procedure; 100

per cent sample household were aware of the right to minimum wages and the level

of minimum wages; but none was aware of about the right to the unemployment

allowance; only 22 per cent were aware of minimum worksite facilities; 37 per cent of

the sample household knew all about the mandatory availability of muster rolls at the

worksite and none was aware of the list of works under the NREGA (Table 5.3.2).

5.3.8 Potential benefits of NREGA

In this regard, only 12 per cent of the respondents replied that NREGA

enhanced food security; 15 per cent respondents agreed that NREGA provided

protection against extreme poverty; 7 per cent opined that NREGA helped to reduce

distress migration. Moreover, 12 per cent of the total respondent agreed that NREGA

had given greater economic independence to women and 27 per cent agreed that

NREGA had generated purchasing power at local economy (Table 5.3.3).

5.3.9 NREGA and food security

Some questions were also in the schedule related to food security. Of the 200

sample families, only 26 per cent replied that they were getting two full meals

throughout the year 2009; 39 per cent of the total households did not get sufficient

food for one month; 28 per cent per cent family replied that they did not get sufficient

food for two months and 30 per cent per cent did not get sufficient food for above two

months. And it was found that 19.50 percent families took loan to cope with the

situation; 10 per cent coped with catching fishes ; 5 per cent went for asking from

24

24

well to do neighbors and the rest 16 per cent coped with from any other sources

(Table 5.3.3) .

5.4 Some qualitative questions related to food security

Table 5.3.3 shows the responses of the sample households to some qualitative

questions (in percentage terms) by the respondents related to NREGA functioning. All

respondents i.e., 100 per cent replied that they had not paid any amount as bribe to get

the job; usually job cards were kept with job card holders but at the time of

interviewing, 70 percent opined that job cards were always with them and the rest 30

per cent replied in negative. It happened because official person collected job cards

from them for the entry of working days and payment records. After the entry, they

returned cards to the job holders. All the respondents were aware of monitoring of the

NREGA work but very few (7 per cent) respondents knew the person concerned to

whom the duty was entrusted. Gram Sabha, Vigilance and Monitoring Committee

(VMC), Local Beneficiaries Committee, Gram Panchayat, Intermediate Panchayat,

Programme Officer, District Panchayat, the District programme Officers, the State

Government and the Central Government are the monitoring agencies to monitor the

NREGA work. When it was enquired about any complaint lodged by any respondents,

it was answered in the negative.

Table - 5.3.3

Qualitative Questions related to functioning on NREGA (Percentage of hh)


Potential NREGA enhanced food security 12 88 0

benefits of NREGA provided protection against extreme poverty 15 85 0

NREGA NREGA helped to reduce distress migration 7 88 5

NREGA gave greater economic independence to women 12 88 0

NREGA generated purchasing power at local economy 27 73 0

Questions Did your family get full two meals throughout year 2009 26 74 0

related to Family did not get sufficient food for one month 39 61 0

food

security Family did not get sufficient food for two month 28 72 0

Family did not get sufficient food for above two months 30 70 0

How did you cope with the situation- take loan 19.50 80.50 0

Catch fish/rat/crab etc 10 90 0

Near /sometime starvation/take meal only once 0 0 0

Begging 5 95 0

Any other 16.00 0 0

Specific responses against the question asked in the sample households are

presented in Table 5.3.4.

There was no record of migration of family member for any job at distant

place. They opined that there was no such opportunity for them till then. Sometimes

they opted to work on nearby city or town as NREGA failed to provide employment

throughout the year. The NREGA could create job opportunity for a certain period of

the year only and it remained in operative silent during rainy season. On an average, it

was 1.26 persons in each family who migrated in search of work to nearby city or

town. No record was found about any family member migrated back to village to

work in NREGA again. Of the total beneficiary households, 12 per cent of the family

members having job card migrated to city or t own with dissatisfaction of NREGA.

Table - 5.3.4

Quantitative questions related to NREGA functioning (Percentage of hh)

Q.1. If you paid some amount to get job card: how much for job card and how much bribe.

Answer I have not paid anything, hence the question does not arise (100%).

Q.2. If the job card is not kept with you, what is the reason for that?

Answer Sometimes, it is with the concerned official person for entry of working days and payment (70%).

Q.3. If there is any authority who monitors the functioning of NREGA then describe the details?

Answer Block level person or Gram Rozgar Sahiok (GRS) are the two authorities to monitor the function.

Q.4. If you lodged any complaints give details and also provide details of what action was taken

Answer There is none to response to any complaint lodged to the authority.

Q.5. Provide descriptions of the work and its starting date?

Answer Bongaigaon -(1) started on 28.11.2008. Road Connectivity

Bongaigaon -(2) started on 20.01.2009. Water Conservation and Water Harvesting

Cachar -(2) started on 29.01.2009 .Road Connectivity

Caghar -(2) started on 02.06. 2009. Road Connectivity

Dibrugarh -(1) started on 22.01.2009. Road Connectivity

Dibrugarh -(2) started on 20.1.2009. Flood Control and Protraction

Nagaon - (1) started on 01.04.2009. Road Connectivity

Nagaon -(2) started on 23.03.2009 Renovation of traditional water bodies



Q.6. Provide details of family members migrated to city after implementation of NREGA and why?

Answer Question of migration of family member does not arise as we do not have surplus member in

workable ages. Sometimes family member opts to work near by city or town. It happens because

NREGA program remain close during rainy season.

Q.7. Provide details of family members migrated back to village to work in NREGA and why?

Answer This question is related to the Q.6. Some periodic cases may happens in our locality but very rare.

Q.8. Provide details of family members migrated to city after implementation of NREGA and why?

Answer This question is also related to Q.6 & Q.7. Hence it does not arise.

Q.9. Provide details of family members migrated to city with dissatisfaction of NREGA and why?

Answer

Some family member having job cards are not willing to work under NREGA for two main

reasons:

1) The beneficiaries need wage at the spot on the same days. It is not happened in NERGA.

2) Present wage of NREGA is Rs. 100/-. Which are lees than the existing market rate. It usually

exceeds the wage rate of NREGA. Note: This table is only indicative and the answer need to be coded and presented in percentage terms

26

26

They were not willing to work under NREGA because they were needy people and

they could not wait for longer period for receipt wage. During field investigation,

three different wage rates of NREGA were recorded, viz., Rs.77, Rs.80 and Rs.100 at

different point of times which were less than the market rate of Rs.120. Moreover, if

they worked outside NREGA, they usually get one free meal by the employer for

which they preferred to work out side NREGA.

Table 5.3.5 provides details on the potential benefit of the NREGA in terms of

percentage of households. Of the total sample households, 12 per cent opined that it

enhanced food security; 15 per cent opined that it provided protection against extreme

poverty; 7 per cent opined that it helped to reduce distress migration; 24 per cent

opined that it helped to reduce indebtedness and 12 per cent opined that it gave

greater economic independence to women.

Table - 5.3.5

Provide details on the following potential benefits of NREGA (Percentage of hh)

Q.1. NREGA enhance food security

Answer Yes, for 12 percent sample families only.

Q.2. NREGA provide protection against extreme poverty


Q.3. NREGA helped to reduce distress migration


Q.4. NREGA helped reduce indebtedness


Q.5. NREGA gave greater economic independence to women

Answer Yes, for 12.00 percent sample families only. Note : This table is only indicative and the answers need to be coded and presented in percentage terms

Of the total sample households, 18.50 percent felt that they did not have

sufficient food for the whole year. When asking the reasons thereof, they stated that

they did not have required employment; they did not have any other alternative

sources to earn their livelihood; they did not have capital to start any petty trade; they

had also very limited scope for acquiring institutional credit and the rate of interest

was very high for non-institutional (Private sources) credit. Besides food

insufficiency, 26.50 per cent of households opined that they were in shortage of

hygienic dwelling houses, electricity, hygienic sanitary system, fuel, clothing,

footwear, safe drinking water, minimum wooden furniture, minimum transportation

means, tools and implement, etc. In this regard, 100 per cent of households opined

that they did not get sufficient days of employment as wage laborers and the NREGA

was not able to reach the required dimension in providing adequate employment.

Towards its amelioration, 100 percent households suggested reviewing the wage rate

keeping parity with outside rate; provision might be made to provide employment at

least for 150 days with enhanced rate of wage. (Table-5.3.6)

Table - 5.3.6

Quantitative questions related to food security (Percentage of hh)

Q.1.

Do you feel that your family does not have sufficient food for the whole of year give

reasons

Answer Yes, there are sufficient numbers of sample beneficiaries (18.50 percent of

households) were suffered in food deficiencies.

Q.2. Have you faced any deprivations other than food insufficiency? If yes, explain

Answer Yes, clothing, footwear, fuels, utensils, etc (i.e. 26.50 percent of households) was in

shortage than in requirement.

Q.3. What were the main difficulties you and your family faced during the last year ?

Answer Inadequate food, clothing and sheltered (i.e. 22.00 percent of households) were the

main difficulties of the sample beneficiaries during the last year.

Q.4. What is the most important thing your household lacks

Answer Lack of safe dirking water, hygienic sanitary system and electricity (i.e. 31.00

percent of households) are the most important thing for the sample beneficiary

households.

Q.5. What is the suggestion for amelioration

Answer 1. Wage rate be increased to Rs.150.00 instead of existing rate of Rs. 100.00.

2. Employment should be given during lean season in each every year.

Q.6. Any suggestions to improve NREGA functioning

Answer 1. Employment be given in productive work so that we can harvest extra benefit.

2. Beneficiaries must be aware about the sanctioning work and amount in detail.

In this regard, role of Gaon Sabha has to do a lot.

3. Proper monitoring of work is very important.

4. Any kind of political intervention should be stopped.

5. More power should given to Gram Panchayat (Financial Power).

Note: This table is only indicative and the answer need to be coded and presented in percentage terms

Some suggestions were incorporated here as given by the sample households

to improve NREGA functioning:

1. Wage rate may be enhanced keeping parity with existing market rate

2. Employment may be extended to more than 100 days.

3. More transparency is needed in the sense that the beneficiaries have the access

to information on the sanctioned work and financial involvement therein.


5. During Kharif crop season, employment is not as acute as in other season.

Therefore, they have a suggestion to start the NREGA programme during lean

season as well.

28

28

5.5 Summary of the chapter

Household assets are also one of the measuring sticks to judge the economic

status of a household to know whether they are living above the poverty line or below

the poverty line. Land is a permanent asset of every household. Division of family

reduces size of holding of owned land among all the households. Also selling of land

was becoming a very common phenomenon among the poor people whenever acute

financial crisis appears which also further reduces the size of own holding. It has been

observed that almost all the household posses homestead area. Only a few households

have extra crop land of their own. Land value is ever increasing irrespective of its

location. In general, land value is much higher nearby the city or town. Therefore land

was the most valuable assets for beneficiaries and non beneficiaries. Financial

vulnerability was also observed among households. Majority of the households

prefers to borrow from traders-cum –money lenders. Rate of interest was 10 per cent

per month. There was no report of paying any fees charges or bribe to get the job

card. Some irregularities in job cards such as incomplete entry, no entries, over

writing, blank signature column etc, were observed; 70 per cent of the job card

holders got job within 15 days from the date of application. There was no report of

paying unemployment allowances in case of failure to provide work within 15 days.

There was no record of getting wages within 7 days. There were no reports of wage

paid less than the fixed wage rate and 72 per cent of beneficiaries did not have any

negative comment over the transparency of the whole work, 83 per cent had a positive

reply on usefulness of the NREGA work. In case of durability of the work,

beneficiaries had different types of comments. Labour migration was still going on

among the family members as NREGA is not able to provide adequate employment.

Regarding potential benefit of NREGA, a large percentage did not have satisfactory

comments and so was happened in case of food security. Some suggestions were

incorporated here as furnished by the interviewees.

1. All the beneficiaries suggested raising the wage rate keeping parity with outside

rate. Wage rate may be enhanced keeping parity with existing market rate of wage

labour.

2. Employment may be extended to more than 100 days.

3. More transparency on the matter of the sanctioned work and financial involvement

therein.


5. During kharif crop season, employment is not as acute as in other season.

Therefore, they have a suggestion to start the NREGA programme during lean

season employment.

*****

30

30

CHAPTER – VI

NREGA IMPACT ON VILLAGE ECONOMY

This chapter focuses on existing infrastructure of the sample villages during

survey time. All together 10 villages were surveyed two villages from each selected

district. Selection of the villages was done as per the guidelines of the study, which

had already been mentioned elsewhere in the report.

6.1 Infrastructure available within the village (Percentages of villages)

Table 6.1 reflects a comparative scenario of infrastructure available within the

villages (sample villages) and the nearest villages. Information was collected from

knowledgeable persons and the respective panchayat offices of the villages. Of the 10

sample villages, 100 percent of villages have Road connectivity within the villages

while it was 100 percent in the nearest villages as well. The concerned interviewees

also reported that not all connective roads were all weatherproof. There was no

railway connectivity within the sample villages and the nearest villages. Mobile

connectivity covered 100 per cent in both the categories of villages. Its services were

at a distance of 0.50 km. Post office services covered 70 per cent of the sample

villages and 30 percent of them had it in nearest villages. About 30 per cent of the

sample villages had Co-operative Credit Society and 70 per cent of them had it in the

nearest villages. Banking services covered 20 percent of the sample villages and it

was of 80 per cent covered by the nearest villages with an average distance of 3.5 km.

Neither sample villages nor nearest villages were covered by services of Commercial

Bank. While 20 per cent villages had RRB, services and 80 per cent of them availed

its services from nearby villages at an average distance of 3.50 km. Agricultural

Produce Market covered 10 per cent of the sample villages and 90 per cent of them

availed the market facilities from nearest villages at an average distance of 1.20 km.

All the sample villages (100%) have Self Help Group Centre. 100 per cent of the

Sample villages had primary school and 30 percent of the sample villages had

secondary school and 70 per cent had it in the nearest villages at an average distant of

2.50 km. Only 30 per cent of the sample villages had their own the primary health

centre and the rest 70 per cent of them had its service from nearby villages at an

average distance of 1.50 km. Two sample villages (20%) have Higher Secondary

School and there is no such school in the nearest villages. Average distance to such

school from both the villages is about 1.30 km while 20 per cent sample villages had

services of Hospital/Dispensary while 80 per cent of them had it from nearby villages

at an average distance of 1.75 km. Only 20 per cent of the sample villages had GP

offices and 80 per cent, they had it nearby villages at an average distance 2.25 km.

Table 6.1

Infrastructure available within the village (Percentage of villages)

Particulars

Within

village

Nearest

village

If nearest village,

average distance

(Kms)

Road connectivity 100.00 00.00 0.00

Railway connectivity 0.00 0.00 0.00

Landline or mobile connectivity 100.00 0.00 0.00

Post Office 70.00 30.00 2.50

Co-operative credit society 30.00 70.00 2.25

Regional Rural Bank 20.00 80.00 3.50

Commercial Bank 0.00 100.00 4.25

Agricultural Produce Market 10.00 90.00 1.20

Self Help Group Centre 100.00 0.00 0.80

School Primary 100.00 0.00 0.00

School Secondary 20.00 80.00 1.30of

School Higher Secondary 20.00 80.00 1.25

Primary Health Centre 30.00 70..00 1.50

Hospital/Dispensary 20.00 80.00 1.75

Gram Panchayat Office 20.00 80.00 2.25

Fair Price Shop 90.00 10.00 0.80

Any other 0.00 0.00 0.00

All most all the sample villages (90%) had fair price shops of their own. From the

table, it has been observed that the most of the infrastructure were available within the

sample villages; if not available, they were approachable in the nearest villages at an

easily accessible distance.

6.2 Changes in occupational structure

Table 6.2 depicts the changes in occupational structure of the sample villages

in terms of percentages of households in the reference year 2009 over 2001. The

percentage of cultivators (21.43%) and household small industry (3.24%) had

decreased in 2009 over 2001 while agricultural labourer (11.74%), other

manufacturing /mining (0.31%), labourer engaged in construction (34.71%), trade,

commerce and business (18.86%), transport and communication (4.57%) and other

services (5.14%) recorded marginal increase in 2009 over 2001. Labourer in

construction work might have increased due to impact of NREGA or due to rapid

32

32

changes in some other sectors. However, decrease of workers’ opportunity in

household industry is a matter of concern for the village economy.

Table 6.2

Occupational structure (% of households)

Occupation

Reference period

2009 2001

1. Cultivators 21.43 25.67

2. Agricultural Labour 11.74 10.74

3. Household Small Industry 3.24 4.46

4. Other Manufacturing /mining 0.31 0.27

5. Construction 34.71 33.76

6..Trade,Commerce and Business 18.86 17.38

7. Transport and Communication 4.57 3.25

8.Other Services 5.14 4.47

9.Total 100.00 100.00

6.3 How has NREGA affected wage rates in selected villages?

Table 6.3 focuses on wage rate for different activities over a period of times..

There is no doubt about it that NREGA has enhanced wage rate for both skilled and

unskilled labourer. It helps to protect the wage earners from exploitation through

increase job opportunity. Wage rate for male and female worker for different

activities under observation has increased in 2009 over 2005 (NREGA introduced)

Table 6.3

Wage rates for different activities (average of all villages-Rs./Day)

Activity

Reference period (2009) Before NREGA(2005)

Male Female Male Female

Prevailing Agricultural Wages 88 78 70 60

Prevailing Non Agricultural Wages 96 84 75 65

Construction 120 90 100 80

Mining 85 75 75 65

Other skilled work

Electrician 150 0 120 0

Plumber 150 0 120 0

Pump-set boring 150 0 120 0

6.4 How has NREGA affected charges for agricultural operations?

Table 6.4 presented a comparative picture of changing labour charges against

different activities of agricultural operations before NREGA in 2005 and 2001 after

NREGA in 2009. Before NREGA, the wage rate has increased in 2005 as compared

to wage rate of 2001 but in 2009, the wage rate has increased at a faster rate, which

indicates that NREGA has a significant role in increasing wage rate.

Table 6.4

Prevailing labour charges for agricultural operations (average of all villages) (Rs. / day)

Activity Reference period Before NREGA

2009 2005 2001

Ploughing 80 65 45

Leveling 80 65 45

Weeding 80 65 45

Paddy transplanting 75 60 40

Harvesting of wheat 75 60 40

Harvesting of paddy 75 60 40

Harvesting of grams 75 60 40

Harvesting of pigeon pea 75 60 40

Harvesting of ragi 75 60 40

Harvesting of jowar 75 60 40

Harvesting of Maize 75 60 40

Cane-cutting 75 60 40

Harvesting other crops 80 70 50

Digging of potatoes 90 70 50

Threshing pf wheat 90 70 50

Winnowing of wheat/paddy 90 70 50

6.5 Various changes in the village economy after implementation of NREGA

Some qualitative aspects of NREGA are presented in Table 6.5 based on the

interaction with village people on the economic changes that have taken place in the

villages after implementation of NREGA in the last year. There was shortage of

agricultural wage labour as reported by 38 per cent of the sample respondents at some

points during last year and rest opined that it remained almost same even after

implementation of NREGA irrespective of the seasons. Some of them (13%) did not

have definite answer about shortage of labour. A large majority of households (68%)

opined that after implementation of NREGA, the cost of production in agriculture

increased by 10 per cent. Earlier they compelled to work at a lower rate because of

food security of the family. After NREGA, they were at a better off position to

bargain for higher wage and farmers were bound to hike the wage rate of the labourer.

For this reason, the cost of production of agricultural produces increased. Only 9 per

cent of the total households opined that they were not sure about increase in cost of

production. Very few percent (8%) conveyed that after NREGA the cost of

production in agriculture increased to the extent of 20 to 50 per cent and not beyond

that. Similarly, after implementation of NREGA, no record was found about the

family labour that migrated earlier to town /city came back to work in the village.

Some of the households (22%) could not furnish any specific viewpoint.

34

34

Table 6.5

Qualitative Questions on Changes in the Villages during Last One Year (% of hh)


Was there shortage of agricultural wage labour at some point during

last year 38 49 13

After implementation of NREGA has there been a shortage of

agriculture labour 36 41 23

After implementation of NREGA the cost of production in agriculture

increased by 10 percent because of scarcity of labour

68 23 9

Cost increased by 20 to 50 percent 8 56 36

Cost increased by 50 to 75 percent 0 100 0

Cost increased by 100 percent 0 100 0

After implementation of NREGA labour who migrated earlier to

town/city are coming back to work in the village

0 78 22

More labour is migrating from the village as wage rate in the town is

higher than wage rate under NREGA or other activities in the village

43 52 5

Some labour has come back to work in NREGA but others are

moving to the town/city because of wage differential

30 55 15

There is no change in labour migration by NREGA activities 58 42 0

After NREGA change in wages of casual labourers has increased 81 19 0

After NREGA change in wages of casual labourers has decreased 0 69 31

After NREGA change in wages of casual labours remained same 20 70 10

The trend of people living in village and going to work outside for

longer period has increased

35 58 7

Has living standard improved in your village since the introduction of

NREGA 54 22 24

After NREGA have you witnessed increase in household consumption

in village 35 34 31

After NREGA have you witnessed more children are now going to the

school 45 23 32

After NREGA , have you witnessed change in trend of attached

labour in agriculture 54 35 11

After NREGA, have villagers' awareness towards Government

Schemes increased 81 10 9

The number of households from which family labour migrated from the

villages due to higher wage rate in the town or city was 43 per cent and 5 per cent of

the households did not have any opinion on it. Some of the family labourers came

back to work in NREGA but some others migrated to the town or city because of

wage differential. In this case 30 per cent of households opined, ‘Yes”, 55 percent

opined, “No” and 15 per cent opined that they were not sure about it. Of the total

households, 58 per cent opined that there was no change in labour migration by

NREGA activities. A significant number of households (81%) opined that after the

introduction of the NREGA, the change in wages of casual labourers has increased

but at the same time, they also opined that wages were bound to increase due to price

hike of commodities in the market. Most of the households (69%) conveyed that after

NREGA change in wages of casual labourer decreased. Some households (20%)

opined that after NREGA, wages of casual labourers remained same and some

households (10%) who were not sure about it. However, a significant number of

households (70%) were against of the viewpoint. Nearly (58%) also denied that the

trend of people living in village and going to work out side for longer period had

increased even after implementation of NREGA. About 54 per cent of the households

conveyed that their living standard improved since introduction of NREGA, and 22

per cent did not agree with the opinion. (35%) of the households reported that that

there was increase in their household consumption after NREGA; 34 percent

households disagreed with the same and the rest 31 per cent opined that they were not

sure about it. A sizeable number of households (45%) opined that the introduction of

NREGA more children were found to go to school. Of the total households, 54 per

cent have witnessed that after NREGA there was a change in trend of attached labour

in agriculture. A significant number of households i.e., 81 per cent of households

opined that awareness towards Government Schemes had increased after the

introduction NREGA.

Table 6.6 gives some opinions of the village people about the functioning of

NREGA. They opined that the shortage of agricultural labourers was there even

before implementation of NREGA during Jun, July, August, November and

December but shortage of labourers has increased largely after introduction of

NREGA. Some changes in wages of casual labourers were also noticed during last

three years after introduction of NREGA. The wage of casual labour was of Rs. 60.00

in 2006, Rs.70.00 in 2007, Rs.80 in 2008, Rs.90.00 in 2009 and Rs. 100 in 2010.

Regarding changes in standard of living of the villagers after introduction of NREGA,

they replied that besides food security, NREGA had increased their purchasing power

to fulfill some of their basic needs such as wearing, household furniture, utensil etc.

Household consumption of food and non-food items also had increased after

introduction of NREGA. They started providing requirements of school going

children. Due to introduction of NREGA, the attached labourer in agriculture became

scarce as they can earn more when employed in NREGA. Therefore, it became matter

of concern for state agriculture. While working in NREGA, workers got an

opportunity to interact with panchayat people and other officials, which enabled them

to gather knowledge about other different types of rural programmes. At the end of

36

36

the interactions with village people, the following suggestions emerged to improve the

activities of NREGA for the benefits of wage labourers and cultivators.

Table 6.6

Qualitative Questions About the Functioning of NREGA

Q.1. Was there a shortage of agricultural wage labour at some point during last year ?

If so in which month?

Answer No, agricultural wage labours were not shortaged before implementation of NREGA.

Q.2. After implementation of NREGA, has there been a shortage of agriculture labour? If yes in

which years/months?

Answer Yes, after implementation of NREGA, during November, December, January and Feburary,

agricultural wage labours were shortaged in each of every year.

Q.3. Give details of change in wages of casual labour during the last 3 years after NREGA

Answer During 2006, the wage of casul labour was Rs. 60.00.

During 2007, the wage of casul labour was Rs. 70.00.




Q.4. In what way the standard of living improved in your village since the introduction of NREGA ?

Answer Food security as well as purchasing of consumerable durable goods of the households.

Q.5. In what way the household consumption improved in your village since the introduction of

NREGA

Answer It helps to purchase the more nutritious diets like milk, cheese, butter, etc. for consumption.

Q.6. In what way NREGA has impacted the children education

Answer Purchasing of books, uniforms, footwear, etc. of the school-going children.

Q.7. In what way NREGA has impacted the trends of attached labour in agriculture

Answer It reduceds the expenditure on attached labour in farm households.

Q.8. In what way NREGA has improved villagers' awareness towards Government Schemes

Answer After implementation of NREGA, the villagers were met the Government officials frequently.

So that, the villagers got knowledge from officials on different Government Schemes.

Q.9. Your suggestio0ns to improve the implementation of NREGA for the benefits of both labourers

as well cultivators ?

Answer 1. It helps to adopt attach labour in agriculture.

2. It helps to purchase of different inputs in agriculture.

3. It helps to hired machine and bullock power for the farm households.

4. It helps in socio economic standards of the farm households.

Note: This table is only indicative and the answers need to be coded and presented in percentage terms

1. All programmes under NREGA should be implemented timely

2. More area specific programmes are needed

3. Some productive programmes may be incorporated in the potential areas of the

villages so that they may be benefited directly as well as indirectly.

4. Programmes may be implemented during lean period of workers.


It gives a comparative scenario of infrastructure available within the village

(sample village) and the nearest villages. All these information were collected from

knowledgeable persons and the respective Panchayat offices concerned. Interviewees

reported that not all connective roads were all weatherproof. Regarding infrastructure,

all the sample villages and nearest villages had all the facilities such as road

connectivity, Post Offices, Bank services, School, Agricultural Produce Market,

Primary health Centre, Hospital / dispensary, Gram Panchayat Offices, Fair Price

Shops, etc., within a distance from minimum of 0.50 km to 2.50 Km. In occupational

structure, the percentage of cultivators and household small industry had decreased

marginally in 2009 over 2001 while agricultural labourer other manufacturing

/mining, labourer engaged in construction, trade, commerce and business, transport

and communication, other services increased during the reference period. Increase of

labourer in construction might be due impact of NREGA or due to rapid changes in

other sectors but decrease of opportunity in household industry is a matter of concern

for village economy. There is no doubt about it that NREGA has pushed up the wage

rate for both skilled and unskilled labourer. It helped to protect the wage earners from

exploitation in the sense that as it increased the job opportunity. Wage rate for male

and female in all the activities under observation, increased in 2009 over 2005, the

year of introduction of NREGA. It increased the wage rate of agricultural operation.

Earlier, the wage of different agricultural operations was at a lower level and workers

were bound to work because of food security of the family. However, after

implementation of NREGA they were at a better off position for reaping higher wages

as there was an option to work under NREGA, the farmers were bound to hike the

wage rate for the labourer, and as a result, it increased the cost of production of

agricultural produces. When price goes up, workers want higher wages. Introduction

of NREGA may also created shortage of agricultural wagers. It was also observed

that NREGA had a negative impact on migration of family labourer who went for

work in nearby city or town. Due to implementation NREGA, attached labourer in

agriculture became scarce as they could to earn more when employed in NREGA.

Therefore, it is a matter of concern for agriculture as a whole. At the same time, wage

differential in NREGA also affected migration of labourers especially when NREGA

fails to maintain parity with outside rate. It was also observed that NREGA increased

awareness of the respondent towards other government’s programmes or schemes.

Besides food security, NREGA also increased their purchasing power to fulfill some

basic needs such as wearing, household furniture, utensil etc. Household consumption

in food and non-food items also found to be increased after introduction of NREGA.

Being at a better off position, the beneficiaries started catering to the needs of their

school-going children.

*******

38

38

CHAPTER – VII

CONCLUDING REMARKS AND POLICY SUGGESTION

The NREGA is a new life line of the rural people who earn their livelihood as

wage earners. It also gears up the social relationship among the rural people which is

a pre requisite condition to build a strong society or a nation. It also reduces the

gender difference for some works which are in practice in rural areas. It is also

observed that female workers, both urban and rural, receive lesser wages than their

male counterparts for doing the same jobs. The Act of the NREGA removed the

gender difference in wages. The right to participate in works for women was made

compulsion as per the Act of NREGA that there must be at least 33 per cent

participation for women. It has been observed during field investigation that most of

the households earned their livelihood as unskilled casual labourers. A few

households’ posses own cultivated land. They usually go for Kharif paddy cultivation

and a few households go for Rabi crops mainly vegetables to meet the household

demand only. Sporadic cases were also found as commercial growers. Production was

not sufficient due to inadequate coverage of area and low yield rate.

Asset positions of most of the households were in a pathetic condition. They

had no option other than to go for wage earning or to as petty vegetable vendors. They

also reported they did not get work for every day. They had to sit idle for at least for 3

to 4 days in a week. Very few households had two balance meals in a day. Most of the

households lived below the poverty line. Other socio-economic indicators were also in

a deplorable condition. However, BPL rice at subsidized rate and the scheme, the

Antyodaya Yojona (AAY) which provides 35 kgs of rice almost at free of cost to the

selected families are also helping some of the poor families to overcome food

deficiency. But from their physical appearances, they seemed to be suffering from

nutritional deficiency. In fact, NREGA gave a new life to these categories of the

people as it provided hard cash to the needy people and they were getting an

opportunity to purchase other essential items for their food basket. But success of this

programme depends upon the implementing wings attached to it. It also created an

opportunity to reduce the percentage of poverty level of the state. In Assam, about

22.30 per cent people are still living under poverty line. It also activated the

Panchayati Raj system which was almost in dormant state particularly in Assam

before implementation of NREGA.

From age group classification of the sample households, one can readily have

an idea about the population trend. More population in minor age group indicates a

trend of high growth rate of population and a higher population in workable age gives

an opportunity for a nation for economic growth if they can be utilized as human

resource or else it would become a course. Population above 60 years is considered as

old citizens. It has been observed that expectation of life is increasing along with

improvement of medical care. Therefore they cannot be treated as invalid persons.

Major problems arise from the unskilled workable population as their job

opportunities are shrinking on account of rapid development of machinery equipment.

This chunk is neglected as they represent a sizeable portion of the total population. It

is a major problem in rural areas across states of the country. NREGA is a ray of hope

for this section of people and it is an opportunity for them to take part in the

development agenda of the country with dignity.

However, the scheme NREGA may have an adverse effect on availability of

labourers for agricultural operation. Since labourers prefers to work under NREGA on

account of less supervision and less work that too in groups with some other facilities

created by it. As a result, farmers are bound to compete among themselves to offer

higher wages to combat with the shortage labourers in peak season and it would

increase the cost of production. If farmers are not able to bear the expenditure

incurred in farming, they have no option in their hand but to switch over from farming

to other activities to earn their livelihood. Probable consequences arising out of this

need to be assessed properly so that the NREGA cannot stand as an obstacle for

farming community. At the same time what would be effect on farming community if

the NREGA increases the purchasing power of labourers as a whole.

From overall observation, the scheme could not able to keep its commitment

of providing 100 days employment in a year to the rural workers and it failed to create

assets but it seemed to have paid good political dividends for the governments.

Suggestions

Some suggestions are incorporated here on the basis of field observations and

interactions with enlightened village people.

40

40

1. All the programmes under NREGA must be well planned well ahead of time

with a definite time frame for completion.

2. State NRGEA has much more to do to strengthen the Panchayati Raj system,

curtailment of direct intervention of other departments or agencies associated

with it, would be a welcome step in this regard. The village administration

should be brought down to Taluk level so that all the development

programmes under NREGA can reach the villages situated at a distance from

Development Block.

3. In Assam, there are more than 26 lakh farmers of which about 85 per cent

belong to marginal and small categories. They can earn some amount of

additional income from NREGA. It is possible only after completion of

plantation and harvesting process. Therefore, starting of NREGA programme

must have parity with leisure (free) time of the farmers so that they can earn

some additional income besides crop cultivation.

4. Present target of 100 days employment per house hold should be increased to

at least 150 days.

5. Wage rate should have parity with outside rate and ongoing price hike which

would reduce the migration of labour from village to nearby township or city.

6. In Assam, there are abundant lands lying as cultivable waste land under some

department. Such land could be brought under cultivation having crop

potential through NREGA programme. Such venture would be beneficial for

state economy as well as wage earners.

7. More transparency is needed about the sanctioned work and financial

involvement therein.

8. Auditing may be done through an extra government agency in addition to

Gram Panchayat to check mishandling of fund

9. Panchayat should be empowered financially and job responsibility should be

distributed to all the elected members. Some amount of NREGA programmes

may be granted as remuneration of the elected panchayat members.


11. During kharif crop season, employment is not as acute as in other season.

Therefore, village people have a suggestion to start the NREGA programme

during lean season of employment.

12. All natural water bodies & forest areas should be brought under NREGA

programme to make it as income generating units.

At the end, it may be concluded that if all the loopholes in distribution of job

cards and payment of wages , miss use fund, etc could be brought under strict

vigilance, there will be no doubt that NREGA would be a boon against rural

poverty. It is also to be noted that all the programmes of NREGA must have definite

dimension to lead the rural masses to a better economic standing. Otherwise it would

remain as an adhoc arrangement to provide meal to needy people through creating

employment only. It is imperative to spread to disseminate the information among all

the people in general and rural people in particular that NERGA does not stand to

create employment only but also provides an opportunity to all of them to serve their

villages, their state and their country as a whole. It would be possible for NREGA

only when it continues to maintain transparency in each and every aspect of

programmes in implementation. It is often said that poverty is a rural phenomenon

which must be negated through judicious implementation of the flagship programmes

like NREGA.

*******

42

42

Annexure I

Action taken report on the comments received from the coordinating

centre ADRT on the Draft Report on “Impact of NREGA on Wage

Rates, Food Security and Rural Urban Migration in Assam”.

Comment 1:

Title of the study should include the name of the state on the cover page and also in

the inner page.

Action: Done as per suggestion.

Comment 2:

The five districts to be selected for the field survey were Karbi Anglong; Kokrajhar;

Darang; Hailakand and Tinsukia. The author has changed all the five districts and has

instead selected Nagaon; Bangaigaon; Sonitpur; Cachar and Dibrugarh. The five

districts suggested by the Coordinator, Centre was based on NREGA implementation

in the three places of NREGA and keeping into account the north. South east west

and central location into account. The author(s) neither discussed with the

coordinating centre at the time of selection of the districts nor provide any reason why

the change in districts was done at their own. An explanation is needed justifying the

change that has been made in the selection of all the five districts.

Action: Selection of the sample districts has been done as per synopsis of the study.

And there was no communication in this respect as per records available with the

centre.

Comment 3:

It was very clearly indicated in the Proposal of the study as well as in Chapter and

Table Plan that the analysis in the Chapter -2 will be based on the data available

through NREGA website and this chapter presents aspects of NREGA functioning in

all the districts of the state. The authors have analyzed only the five selected districts

in the report. In the subsequent chapters analysis is restricted only to selected districts

but Chapter-2 should present the desired tables for all the districts in the state. So the

authors should rewrite the chapter and include all districts (not only the selected

districts) while preparing the tables as done at present in the draft report and the write

up should be done in the context of functioning of the NREGA in all the districts

comparing higher and lower performing districts in the state.

Action: All the desired tables covering all the districts of Assam have been

incorporated and analysis has been done for each district.

Comment 4:

Chapter 3, Table 3.1 mentions that 65 percent households (beneficiary and non

beneficiaries) were involved in migration, however in Table 3.2 and Table 3.3 no

occupation and income is shown for the column of worked as migrant labourer. In

table 3.3 also show the aggregate household income as only 100 percent is given but

the absolute value is not given.

Action: The matter is reviewed and absolute figures have been given in proper places

in the respective table.

Comments 5:

The consumption of cereals is too low. Please check as consumption of cereals per

capita as for Assam it exceeds 12 kgs. per month. You can cross verify it with the

NSS figures for the quantity that also are not provided in the table but it is available

kindly check the NSS reports as quoted below. Similarly consumption figures of

sugar, liquid milk are also too low. Table 3,4b Consumption expenditure, please make

correction in the NSS figures shown in the report just refer to NSS reference given

below.

Action: The matter is reviewed and cross verification with NSS data has been done.

Comment 6:

For the NSS figures for 1993-94, 1999-00 and 2004-05 please refer to the following

NSS reports. Data is available for Assam NSSO (1993-94); “Consumption of some

Important Commodities in India”. National Sample Survey Organisation,

Government of India, March, Report No.404.NSSO (1999-2000);” Consumption of

44

44

some Important Commodities in India”, National Sample Survey Organisation,

Government of India, July, Report No. 461NSSO (2004-2005),” Level and Pattern of

Consumer Expenditure”, National Sample Survey Organization, Government of India,

Dec, Report No. 508

Action: In this regard, NSS data which are available in the web site has been

presented in the respective table .

Comment 7:

For the determinants of participation in NREGA, authors have run simple egression

with number of days worked. Here is the suggestion to experiment with two sets of

equations, at the household level and at the member level, taking dependent variable

as participation=1 and non participation= 0. The independent variable can be chosen

from the list of variables on which data is collected during the field work. Some of the

possible relevant independent variables list is given below for the household

regression and member level regression.

Household level Regression:

Employment

Other than NREGA

HH

Income Other than

NREGA

HH

Size

Land

ownership Dummy

Value

of HH

Asset

Dummy

AAY Card

Holding

Dummy

BPL card Holding

Dummy

SC

Dummy

ST

Dummy

OBC

Member level regression only for the NREGA participating households:

Wage

Rate in

NREGA

Age Education HH size Dummy

AAY

Card holding

Dummy

BPL card

Holding

Dummy

sex

Dummy

SC

Dummy

ST

Dummy

OBC

In addition to logit regression, authors can also use OLS, using number of days

worked in NREGA as the dependent variable at the household level as well as the

member level and using the above mentioned variables as Independent variables. Try

to find out some meaningful determinants of participation in NREGA.

Action: Analysis has been done as per suggestion.

Comment 8:

Chapter 4, Table 4.1: while providing information on numbers of members per

hh employed and number of days employed during the year include another category

of men as that of women and sum total of men + women should supposedly be equal

to aggregate. Also in this table provide another row with details of percentage of HH

employed 100 or more days, selected district wise. For calculating number of

members per hh employed, you need to aggregate total members employed in a

particular district and divide them by total number of households selected under

NREGA beneficiary for that districts (you can give total figure in the parenthesis and

indicate the same below the table). The aggregate number should be total of men +

women. The numbers presented in Table 4.1 do not seem to be consistent as while no

of members per hh employed aggregate is 1.26 and for women it is 0.20 giving an

impression that women share in total employment is only 1/5 th but while in number

of total days per hh employed it shows that aggregate numbers is 48.23 mandays

while women share is 47.59 days leaving the impression that share of men is only less

than one day that is =(48.23-47.59). The aggregate number of days employed in

Bongaigaon is 36.10 while women share is 40.43 days those days not make any sense.

Same thing is repeated in other districts also (No. of Days in a particular district= total

no. of days employed /no of total beneficiary household in that district) kindly follow

this formula for calculating number of days. Average distance from residence where

employed (Kms) is not given that is required in this table. Kindly also provide

information on Percentage of HH employed 100 or more days in the selected districts

and the state.

Action: Necessary correction has been made in the respective table and also

incorporated the information on Percentage of HH employed 100 or more days in the

selected districts and the state.

Comments 9:

Table for migration incidents recorded during the Reference period- Jan, Dec 2009

has not been provided in Chapter 4 that is necessary to [present results on the issue of

migration.10.Chapter 5, Table 5.2: Total loan –sum total loan by source should

match with sum total loan by purpose.. The figures given as purpose of loan is neither

percentage not absolute value as the aggregate for all purposes totals to 27 for

beneficiary and 9 for non beneficiary. One does not know what data the author has

provided. Even the source of loan does not give sum total and figures presented in

46

46

parentheses are percentage as they do not add to 100. Please make correction and the

numbers presented should make sense.

Action: Necessary correction has been made in the respective table

Comment: 10

Chapter 5, Table 5.2 : Total loan-sum total loan by source should match with sum

total loan by purpose. The figures given as purpose of loan is neither percentage not

absolute value as the aggregate for all purposes totals to 27 for beneficiary and 9 for

non beneficiary. One does not know what data the author has provided. Even the

source of loan does not give sum total and figure presented in parentheses are

percentage as they do not add to 100. Please make correction and the numbers

presented should make sense.

Action: Necessary correction has been made in the respective table.

Comment 11:

The Table 5.2b page 63: availability of informal credit society or ASHG available

inthe village is only 3.5 percent but family members being members of such society is

40.5 percent how that can be possible?

Action: The matter is reviewed and necessary correction has been made in the

respective table.

Comment 12:

Table 6.1 page 75: The detailed asked is if the facility available within the village and

if not then which village is the nearest where such facility is available and how much

is the distance of that village from your village. Out of 10 village percentage of

villages which have the facility within the village and how many village have it

nearby village and also give the distance of the nearby village. Make correction in

Action: Information is incorporated in the table as per suggestion.

*****

Annexure II

REFERENCES

1. Rural Development 1999. Satya Sundaram

2. Integrated Development perspective & Prospects, Kumar Jyoti,1987

3. Vasant Desai,1988 Rural Development Vol I

4. Economic Survey of India,2008-09, Govt. of India,

5. Economic & Political Weekly May 14-20, 2001

6. Economic &Political Weekly Feb. 12-18 , 2001

7. Economic & Political Weekly, Feb.26-March 4, 2010

8. Economic & Political Weekly July 10-16 , 2010

9. Economic & Political Weekly , May 19-25, 2011

10. Kurukshetra December 2009.

11. Economic Times 18th

May 2011

12. Economic Times 5 March, 2011

13. Economic Times 4 April, 2011

14. Economic Times 2 June, 2011

15. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005

16. Government of Assam, Economic Survey of Assam, 2009-2010

17. Government of Assam’ Statistical Hand Book of Assam ,2008

18. Government of India. Economic Survey of India, 2009-10.

19. Government of India, India 2010, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting.

20. NREGA website.

*****

IMPACT OF NREGA ON WAGE RATES 2 - AAU

Documents

Transcript of IMPACT OF NREGA ON WAGE RATES 2 - AAU